It's ok to be for Obama, and it's ok to be for Romney, but if you support Ron Paul you are loathed, a PaulBot, a pariah: What LOVELY Americans you pretend to be. Should you all just jump in a lake?

Well, if Obama looses, those of us who got him thrown out, won't be out running around like idiots turning over cars, throwing rocks at cops, lighting fires, and stealing T.V.'s.
Let's just say we will be somewhere else quietly waiting........there won't be a war, there will be a reversal of power - oh yea, that's what I deserve alright.

I agree with most things Ron Paul says. That's better than most politicians.

Why is there problems for people who support Ron Paul? Everyone has a right to root for who they want. It's your right.

agreed

This is the effect of modern mainstream media.

Those supporting the twins are the true definition of insanity.

This is the America, the democracy that Americans want. F**k em. You can't stop a sheep from walking into the slaughter house if they insist on going in.

Both Obama and Romney are Progressives..We don't need these clowns!

I wouldn't take it all too personal. One day Libertarians will get the respect they deserve.

Since the vast majority of Americans have become dependent on government in some way, they have decided that being slaves to that government is more desirable than the freedom our forefathers fought for and won for us, and woe is be to anyone who supports that freedom.

You are so correct. I am saddened by this whole thing.

The federal government doesn't care what the constitution contains they just want to twist it to their own ends.

“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.” James Madison

meh. screw 'em.

Lol!

Isn't Ron Paul the guy who says no war, even if we're attacked?

Not even close. Anyone who thinks that is terribly misinformed.

tell me what did Ron Paul advocate in terms of going after al qaeda?

She will not read that and she'll continue to spread her BS every chance she gets.

he didn't say anything. His argument was created by other people.

I don't view videos. I rely on SHs ability to capture the moment. What's your opinion. Say it, and I'll read it.

OK.
Ron paul's stance on war is to go to congress, decide whether it truely is a national threat , and if it is -Declare war, Get it OVER with and come HOME.

Yeah like how it used to be done, before Bush.

none of this staying in foreign lands and paying millions of dollars to occupy the land for YEARS, WIN the war and bring our boys home. That is what RP's veiw on war is.

I say bring our people HOME and END ALL foreign aid.... Let's start taking care of our own! 'Bout time the rest of the world GREW UP and supported themselves.

oh, but i thought Ron Paul's foreign policy was nutzo??
That is exactly what he would do~ just sayin.

Well, all I sent was a breakdown of his voting record so that you could peruse it for yourself to help either bolster your own stance or possible open your eyes to what he is really doing.

I don't attack too much, I'm just looking to inform people of what the facts are and let them make up their own minds with all of the facts out in front of them, and if we disagree on something that's okay: that's what makes friendships real and long-lasting.

He voted in favor of the Afghanistan war to get Bin Laden (the aftermath however... he's not pleased with as Bush focused our efforts on other agendas).
So he doesnt have a problem with going to war as long as it is just - either to respond to an ongoing attack, or to defend against an imminent attack. Aside from that, only congress can declare war.

Dan, You said:

"He voted in favor of the Afghanistan war to get Bin Laden (the aftermath however... he's not pleased with as Bush focused our efforts on other agendas)."

I want to make a comment about language usage here and change "war" to "combat mission" because THAT'S what he was in favor of doing, just like you explained. Dr. Paul voted in favor of a "combat mission" to get Osama bin Laden.

We are so used to saying "war" to describe a "combat mission" that we use them interchangeably, and there is a huge difference.

If we had done this the way Dr. Paul wanted to do it, we would have sent in an assassination squad (like Seal Team 6), killed bin Laden, and done it with a minimum loss of life, equipment, and resources. To be honest, we could have taken out the Saddam Hussein and his sons in Iraq back in 2003 the exact same way.

"We are so used to saying "war" to describe a "combat mission" that we use them interchangeably, and there is a huge difference. "
You are right, especially since war has not been declared since WW2. Everything has just been an authorization to use force. Sorry for my mistake.

And personally I think that Bin Laden would be captured, or only killed if he resisted if Paul ran it. I dont see how simply killing Bin Laden would be a good idea as he is probably one of the greatest, if not greatest, intelligence assets to Al Qaeda and such information would be an asset. Besides, our government kind of did agree to the Geneva convention that made targeted assassinations illegal.

I do like the idea that we should have captured bin Laden alive if possible and brought him to justice on an international stage.

I am still supporting Dr. Paul and the platform he stands on (for).