To those who think that Ron Paul is further to the left then Obama on Defense

I am sorry to hear that you got probed by muslims, most of us Americans got probed by the banks, and Ron Paul would defend us...

 

Left? No. I think he is the opposite of all warmongering politicians.

 

Paul's a pacifist and terrorist supporter. If he had his way we'd sell this country out to the communists and terrorists.

 

A pacifist.... AND a terror supporter? This seems to be a conflict of interest in my opinion.

 

Keep saying that to yourself...

He's not a pacifist and he definitely isn't a terrorist supporter.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, though, because your statement gave me a good laugh.

 

Will Ron Paul protect you? Are you aware that two of Paul's biggest campaign contributors outside his PAC are Mason Capital Management, and DUNN Capital Management? Both corporations manage conventional financial assets, but they also manage hedge fund assets. Capital management companies help some of the biggest investment banks in this nation. Why should we trust Ron Paul with defending us from banks, and therefore, from enemies abroad?

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contrib.php?cycle=2012&id=N00005906

 

Was not aware of that... hmmmm interesting....... wonder what others have to say about this

 

We both know that isn't true.

Or they're either really terrible contributors... $14,000....

Paul just raised over 4,000,000 from his last money bomb. Boy, that 14,000 is sure going to influence Ron Paul... Boy, they sure made a big impact on his election.

Give me a break.

He was one of the only candidates that didn't support the bailouts. They don't want him.

 

Then why does he have capital management companies attempting to influence him? Seems to me Paul isn't as clean as we thought.

 

Where does it say that a capital management company is trying to influence him? Some of these are just people that work for the corporation that donate money. If it were some number like $500,000, I would look more into it. However, $14,000 isn't very much.

 

The amount is not what matters. What does is that Ron Paul is not as squeaky clean as libertarians portray him to be. He is far from perfect, and emphasizes aspects of a politician that I cannot support.

If you want a leader who's also against the bailouts, a proponent of looking into the actions of the Federal Reserve, and monetary reform, is for banking reform, and is for campaign finance reform, vote for Buddy Roemer. The funny thing about Paul is that he is the anti-establishment candidate, yet has numerous PAC's, and Super PAC's. In this case, he is no better than Mitt Romney.

 

Strange isn't it that Paul has taken money from Stormfront, a rabid white supremicist organization while at the same time years of racial bigotry were included in Paul's newsletter.

 

Just because workers at a corporation donated to him, now he is not squeaky clean... Strange.

I don't think he is squeaky clean. He is just human, after all...

That being said, this shouldn't be something to determine his candidacy.

Shall we take a look at the other candidates??

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contriball.php?cycle=2012

Mitt Romney:
Goldman Sachs $367,200
Credit Suisse Group $203,750
Morgan Stanley $199,800
HIG Capital $186,500
Barclays $157,750

Rick Perry:
Ryan LLC $186,800
Murray Energy $105,504
USAA $69,500
Contran Corp $50,000
Ernst & Young $47,800

Man, that $15,000 sure means he's evil!

 

All these candidates should be attacked for their contributions. These don't even begin to describe how corrupt they are. PAC's and Super PAC's fuel their campaigns. These large organizations are the epitome of what is wrong with the electoral process.

Now, look at Buddy Roemer's campaign contributions. The guy literally had one contribution from a business. The company is called Farm Bureau Insurance, and the amount given to him was $200. Since that campaign contribution, Roemer has designated that only individuals can make contributions up to $100 for his campaign.

 

Is it the amount or the principal that makes him evil?

 

I'm sure he reached out to these guys, in need of their money!!!

I don't quite what you're getting at. Do you think he's controlled by the same beast? Honestly, he just takes the money he receives and does what he wants with it. Sure, he's taken money from known racist organizations... But does that make him a racist? Depends on how it was handled. If he were to go out and ask for money, yes. If he was approached by these people and they had an agenda they wanted accomplished, yes. However, none of these things happened so it is ok.

 

What you seem to be saying is if PAC money is volunteered it's fine no matter the source but if it's solicited it's improper, correct?

If that's the case how do you know if monies are solicited or donated?

 

That is a good point. I don't think we'll ever be able to know for sure how Liberty PAC got the money.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgave2.php?cycle=2012&cmte=C00234641

That link is to a list of people who donated over $200 to Liberty PAC. Scanning through it, I see a lot of self employed and retired people.

All I know is that Paul is not controlled by banks or corporations which is why the establishment is freaking out.

 

Precisely who is "freaking out?"

 

The mainstream media and the whole establishment.

Ignore Ron Paul if he wins

With the amount of media that seems to discredit Paul anytime he does anything, it is pretty noticeable. If Romney were to win the caucus, he would immediately become the GOP nomination in their eyes. If Perry won, he would become the new frontrunner. If Paul wins... Oh, Iowa... Yeah, they don't matter.

Then, once they actually get Paul on their show, they like to only bring up his racist newsletter from 20 years ago. If they aren't talking about that, they're asking him his opinion on the other candidates.

I'm sure there are many other examples, but it is getting late here.

 

Paul is geeting just as much media hype as the other Republican candidates. Perhaps more. And I have yet to hear anyone in the media or politics "freaking out" because of Paul's poll numbers.

And which news shows have targeted Paul's newsletters?

 

Wait! Are you saying that large financial firms are supporting the only free market capitalist running? Why in the world would they do that?

 

I would describe the effort to convince everyone that an Iowa win means nothing if Paul wins as "freaking out". If Newt wins by a fraction of a percentage, it will be a huge momentum boost, but if Paul wins by 5%, it will be inconsequential, lol. It is pretty ridiculous the lengths people are going to avoid debating Paul's policies to continue to consider him irrelevant.

 

Attempting huh? They better "attempt" harder. Ron Paul got more support from Air Force personnel than $14,000. Can't believe you call that an attempt.

 

So people that work for those companies can't give to Ron Paul for fear some idiot may mistake that as the company trying to buy his allegiance? You understand that in 30+ years of politics, he has received money from various supporters, an not once he has changed his political principles.