Ron Paul planning parallel convention to send GOP a 'strong message' in Minneapolis

mccain is a cowardly man who betrays this member of his own party to protect himself from direct talk which would expose his complicity in betraying Americans and American values for the benefit of Israel and big corporations.

He is a pig.

Ron Paul is about the only good thing the Republican party has - but I can't vote for him because I'd prefer to see the Republican party recede back into the gutter those stuffed shirt arrogant criminals came from.

Don't expect to hear much about this from mass media.

Is he going to let Ralph Nader and Bob Barr speak at that convention?

Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air.

Too bad the media prevented him from getting coverage.

Out of respect to his cause, as a Democrat, I will attend the Ron Paul function in protest to GOP nominee, John McCain. There's a principal in play here and I want to show Ron that I support him staying in the race. He deserves better treatment by his own party.

I love listening to Ron Paul speak.
Truth has a different ring to it.

when i read comments like the ones above, i find myself wondering just how representative current.com users are of the general population.. its a shame that more people dont make the connection between hidden agendas and undermining independent thinkers such as paul..

obama/paul 08? its fun to play make-believe every now and then..

peace..

To be clear, I'm still voting for Obama.
Ron Paul's getting a raw deal.

Ron Paul is the leading voice of what our country should be and was supposed to be, all because he follows the rules. He is incredibly smart, (also a doctor) and can out debate anyone because he delivers the truth, the sword of truth if you will, which cuts very deep.

He is against abortion because he says it's murder from a science point of view and it goes against the constitution which protects the right to life (just thought I'd add that because most people don't know that about him).

Under his command this world and country would be an incredibly different place and a lot of people would not be happy with him. He would pull out troops all around the world, monetary support for the needy around the world would not be handed out because he knows that the US needs it so the US can pay off China, and he is not interested in making friends for the sake of making a few bucks.

The people of the United States would need to learn to be responsible for their actions because the US Government would not step in and bail you out if you make stupid decisions, i.e. drug/alcohol abuse, buying $500,000 homes for $0.00 down, and so on. Drugs would be legal as would prostitution but beware that if you screw up your life it is not the governments duty to fix it for you. Welfare would not exist either because that way of life would be a choice, a choice between a great life that you work for or being a bum, not a government option for lazy people. (I know it's good for some, but I believe it's abused)


This way of life would sting some folks for a bit but once this country is shaped up, we would be full of hard working, well paid, deserving citizens who understand what freedom and liberty really mean.


The above is just what came to me about him in machine gun style thoughts to text. Ron Paul is captivating and is enlightenment of government truth.

To play on some politic marketing from Obama - Ron Paul is change, true change. The kind that pisses people off because he knows in order to straighten the world out he doesn't need to try to please everyone he passes by. He's a leader and a leader walks the path that most would not until it's paved smooth.

Damn, I love this guy, I hate that either Obama or McCain are going to win.

Sounds like a sore loser to me.

He may as well speak at the GOP convention. He's in lockstep with all of their social policies:

Denies science and the proven concept of evolution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw&feature=...

Denies Global Warming
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUm1aVwRnC0&feature=...

I mean come one guys, even McCain believes in Evolution and Global Warming.

And his far-right belief that the Ten Commandments are equitable to the Constitution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unVqSwL-_Xk&feature=...

"The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life. The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance." - Ron Paul

Ron Paul is a dangerous enemy of the Constitution and the Libertarian Party. He has it wrong on the Separation of Church and State, and a woman's right to choose which is supported by a majority of Americans. He would reverse Roe v. Wade if allowed. He also supports school-vouchers, which allow private religious schools to enjoy the support of the government and take money away from public schools, where it is needed most. Sounds like a neo-con church-state to me. I don't want my taxes being used to pay from someone else's religious education. If church schools wish to exist, that is fine with me, but let them support themselves and stop living off of unconstitutional government hand outs.

If he claims to want to get government out of our personal lives and off of our backs, and claims to support the Constitution, then why does he not support a woman's right to choose? It is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Ron Paul simply wishes to take our rights away and increase government control over some of the most personal parts of our lives.

He also opposes gay rights and would allow states to discriminate against homosexuals. Either we should all have rights or none of us should have rights at all.

I thought Libertarians were supposed to be economically conservative and socially liberal...not economically conservative ans socially NEO-Conservative...???

It is a shame so many people have had the wool pulled over their eyes...Wasted votes.

Colonial - nope, you're wrong and your quotes are out of context. what a waste.

Obama = change and hope right? when compared to who, Bush?
well so does my dog

Well I'm sure glad you just proved me wrong! Case closed! Maybe you can put his quotes IN context for us...they seem to speak for themselves.

Obama votes to continue to fund a war based on a lie war while Ron Paul opposes funding the war. Obama votes for the Patriot Act to fight imaginary terrorists while Ron Paul opposes the Patriot Act.

I agree, Ron Paul is the GOP's best asset and they won't even let him speak. I don't know his ideas to fix poverty, but (on youtube) his answer was that the US gov. will not let you fix poverty.

Obama's voting record:

# Support veterans via the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act. (Aug 2007)
# Voted NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad. (Aug 2007)
# Voted YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months. (Jul 2007)
# Voted YES on implementing the 9/11 Commission report. (Mar 2007)
# Voted YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees. (Sep 2006)
# Voted YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods. (Sep 2006)
# Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision. (Dec 2005)
# Voted YES on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism. (Jul 2005)
# Voted YES on restoring $565M for states' and ports' first responders. (Mar 2005)
# Sponsored bill for Iraq budget to be part of defense budget. (Jun 2006)
# Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror. (Jun 2007)

# Voted to fund war until 2006; now wants no blank check. (Nov 2007)
# Late to vote against war is not late to oppose war. (Jun 2007)
# Would have voted no to authorize the President to go to war. (Jul 2004)
# Voted YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008. (Mar 2007)
# Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006)
# Voted YES on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)

Obama is Pro-Civil Liberties and 100% Anti-Iraq War. In fact, he was against it before it began and will bring the troops home when he comes president...you can thank him later.

You are completely ignoring Paul's egregious attacks on privacy, science and the Constitution (specifically the 1st Amendment which guarantees the Separation of Church and State and the 14th Amendment which guarantees the right to privacy and an abortion.)

Colonial
If you haven't noticed a lot of money a has already been taken out of our public schools!
Standardized testing destroys education.
The only reason that we can say that education standards have gone up is because from grade 1 these days all kids do is study for one test.
My sister was a highschool teacher that quit because she hated the way the system has become, along with many of her colleagues.
Vote for McCain if you want to, but in my opinion a former POW that wants to continue a war is the worst kind of hypocrite. (regardless to any other issues)

HealBoy,

I agree with you that standardized tests are hurting public education and hurting our kids. They waste money and valuable time that should be used for education. Unfortunately, vouchers will continue to hurt public schools and allow affluent people to receive government subsidies for religious education which is absolutely unconstitutional and Ron Paul supports it. I didn't mean to give the impression that I would vote for McCain. I would never vote for him. McCain and Paul are both members of the Religious Right.

I am an ardent Obama supporter.

I am not a republican but I like Ron Paul, he makes sense to me. I had high hopes for him and probably would have considered voting for him if he were still in the running but alas republicans didn't vote for him. If only he had decided to helm the libertarian ticket again.

Im down for Whatever it take's to see REAL CHANGE...READ WHAT I ADDED..THEN ASK YOURSELF ARE YOU TRUELY READY...JOIN IN..maasanova..IM Down with you til the very end..Day2Day1nSociety..Lata1..

I like Ron Paul, and even though I'm an Obama supporter, I don't believe that Paul made the racial comments that he's accused of. I believe that it's just right wing propaganda.

We can only have (1) President, but we need to hear many voices. Ron Paul says many things that are more mainstream American, than mainstream media.

Mainstream media does not cover what he says for a reason. The reason is to hide their participation in the propaganda campaign that has caused the problems we have today!

We have the Internet, we don't have to rely on mainstream media for propaganda. When they realize their spinning is going to be their destruction, maybe they will change.

Why isn't Ron Paul supporting IMPEACHMENT?

People want a revolution. Then vote different instead of within your party, and especially different than the two that are handpicked for you.

Write in a vote of someone.

You want change? Really? Then you wouldn't be voting for either of the two nominated because that's not change, that's sticking to what has been around for years.

Tell the government that you are sick of their way and formulate your own way by playing within the laws that were put in place to protect us from Government.

It's like watching a bunch of sheep run around baaing about how this is the right way go this way...no no go this way, says another flock. But what's actually going on? They are doing the same thing their parents did before them and their parents before them. So change is all BS, if you ask me.

People are too lazy for change.

Well put Jammer. People are way too lazy for change. And that's how they want us to be. Incapable and dependent on what they hand out.
We're all a bunch of suckers.

I respect Ron Paul and even though he is religiously whacked out, his policies sound more like change than anyone else's.

His convention will probably be more like a klan rally. Why would this racist think he would ever be elected President?

Does anyone know what his actual policies are?

I've heard him speak and basically he's just like every other Republican -- his grand "revolution" pretty much boils down to "let's get rid of government" which is identical to Bush's ideas.

Let's get rid of all government oversight and control, turn everything over to businesses (who will voluntarily police themselves) and by doing so everything will (magically?) be really awesome.

Worked great for Enron. World.com. Aldephia. Coal companies. Beef distributors. And on and on.

I just don't see how that very typical neoconservative ideology is really revolutionary at all.

Some fun facts about Ron Paul:

Paul's stand on the environment is well-known. He is for the dissolution of the EPA, FDA, Department of the Interior and other government agencies whose stated mission is to protect citizens and the environment. Paul has also called for the privatizing of the National Park system (wha..!?!) He also wants to allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and increase the use of coal and nuclear power. (Because nothing says 21st century revolutionary like spending more money on, uh, coal and nuclear).

He wants to abolish the Department of Education

He wants the US to totally withdraw from NATO

He advocates ending all foreign aid.

He wants to abolish the FDA on the theory that it's too expensive and that food safety would work better if we (wait for it....) just relied on citizens to sue companies AFTER they get sick or a loved one dies from eating contaminated food products or unsafe medicine.

None of these ideas sound, well, particularly good.

Privatizing the National Parks?

Really? You guys think handing over our most sacred natural resources (set aside for the public) to private companies (like, oh, Enron) is a great idea?

That abolishing the EPA and just putting coal companies on the "honor system" is a brilliant idea that will make us healthier?

Personally I think these are self-evidently dumb backward-moving ideas....but more importantly I don't see how people who support Obama (the opposite of Ron Paul on all major issues) can also think Ron Paul is a great candidate with great ideas.

This is the only candidate in the election with common sense. But god knows the media doesn't want that.

i personally hate Obama, but i would deff vote a obama/paul ticket that would be effing awsome

Ron Paul makes me smile.