US Presidental Election

[centrajapan]

The US presidental race is alot of fun to follow. The style of democracy there is a little different than in Europe or Japan and US being a big powerful country American policies is something we all are affected by both good and bad..

Next year someone will be taking over the White House after Bush who has done an fantastic job. Some of his contributions have been. Invasion of Afghanistan and an invasion of Iraq. Guatanamo. Patriot Act. The down fall of the US Dollar.

On the Democrat side you have.

Democrats

Obama
Clinton

Republicans

McCain
Huckabee

And my favourite Ron Paul.

On the main stream media here in Norway there are lots of articles about teh Democrats debate and no mention of Ron Paul. Where as if I go to the various internet sites like prisonplanet.com you would think Ron Paul to be the biggest candidate for becoming the next president.

I think Obama will be the new president but I wish it would be Ron Paul as he seems to be a breeze of much needed fresh air in the US politics where as Obama is more or less status quo but he is young, dynamic, charismatic and being the first non white president is probabaly good for the country as a whole I feel and maybe he can lower the hostility between US and countries in the Middle East and help improve the tarnished image of US around the world.

 

[Skuu]

It's a very exciting race, but not particularly because of the candidates. There's a more interesting field this time around due to runners such as Paul, Kucinich (although he's dropped out now) and Gravel. However, as the United States' presidential race is barely democratic, it's about as worthwhile as any race there's been before. The media has chosen which candidates are to be the contenders after learning about their views. Neither Hillary or Barack are particularly anti-war. The fact that Hillary is a woman and Obama is black matters just about as much as whether I'd like to have a beer with Bush. If their policies support killing thousands more men and women, black and white, then it's pretty null and void.

This said, Hillary and Barack are a foot in the pool of American opinion. They are against the war to a significant enough degree to volunteer them against Bush and many of the dangerous Republican runners. It's just a shame they're both so eager to win, and not so eager to do what Americans want.

My main interest in the race previously was Paul and Kucinich, who seemed to be quite popular and had good views. However, as I said, Kucinich has now dropped out after being barred illegally from some debates, and I recently hear Paul say he didn't believe in evolution. Gravel seems to be the only respectable contender, but like Nader, he might as well just be an activist group chanting outside the studios.

 

[centrajapan]

Ron Paul has some strange views. He is against abortion and free gun ownership. Those things I dont understand. I am more free choice and a strict gun ownership. But what I like about him is that he wants to defend each persons liberty and freedom. In that sense I can understand that he thinks gun ownership should be a private issue. Freedom was something US prided themselves in for many years and he wants to move towqards that direction and I think that is the right direction and not this state authority which US is moving into.

Clinton and Obama I have not followed too much. They get most of the media coverage here but I find what Ron Paul has to say to be much more interesting. ALot of big empty words from the Democrats. We are going to change USA. We are the good people etc etc. Lots of nice big words like slogans but without much substance.

 

[Skuu]

Lots of nice big words like slogans but without much substance.

That's what happens when you let corporations control politics.

I didn't know about Paul's stance on abortion. Isn't it a woman's right to do what she wants with her own body? Sounds like Paul might be putting his beliefs in the way of his respect for the constitution.

I feel, at least, the way America functions allows a general liberalisation of politics. I doubt whoever ends up as president will improve the situation a lot but it might nudge it forward. Anything to see Bush's back right?

 

[sabro]

Ron Paul is a Libertarian with some far right skeletons in his closet and he isn't likely to get more than 1% of the vote. With McCain Leading Huckabee and Giuliani fading, the GOP really isn't offering any change from the current Administration's policies. Edwards still had life... Obama has momentum and right now the lead in delegates... but Hillary is leading in the polls...

Like Skuu said however, any change is an improvement.


You guys should check out www.glassbooth.org and see which candidate matches your views.

 

[kameron]

You guys should check out www.glassbooth.org and see which candidate matches your views.

I'm matched 73% with Barack Obama.
It's funny how interested the world is in American politics.

Interesting site, sabro.

 

[sabro]

I matched with Richardson... who dropped out... and Kucinich... who dropped out....

My Primary is in a week. I'm voting by mail.

 

[karlyboo]

I matched 83% with somebody called Mike Gravel. I've never heard of him before!

 

[Skuu]

I matched 83% with somebody called Mike Gravel. I've never heard of him before!

Gravel is really the only respectable candidate. Which tells you two things: 1, he's not gonna win until America's democracy starts functioning. 2, the media don't talk about him seriously.

Kucinich had this policy-tester on his site. Great respect to the man.

If you care about reality then turn off the cable news channels and find out each candidates policies. Most importantly, do they want to keep crushing the ME. Paul is for full withdrawl from the region, for that reason, he's a godsend.

 

[karlyboo]

I looked Gravel up on Wikipedia and he certainly sounds thoroughly sensible :122:

 

[Pachipro]

Ron Paul is a Libertarian with some far right skeletons in his closet and he isn't likely to get more than 1% of the vote.

Not true! Please do your research first before making such a statement instead of spouting what you hear from 7 second sound bites on the news who fear him. He has gotten more votes than Guilanni in most primaries to date and has won every internet poll and even the polls that Fox news does live after the debates.

If the American people were really smart and did their own research before voting for a candidate instead of believing everything they hear and read, they would discover a completely different world that is being kept from the public.

One must remember that the US will get the candidates and the president that the elitist corporations want and no one else. To believe that the president alone sets policy once in office is sadly naive.

Ron Paul, while the best candidate for the job, is not an insider, thus he gets no support from the republicans or the insider and bought media; nor does he receive campaign donations from major corporations, but he has succeeded in having more money donated to him via the internet than any candidate in history. Just a few weeks ago he succeeded in getting $24 million in donations in a matter of a few days.

Ron Paul is a constitutionalist who believes in that the country should be run according to the constitution and the way the founding fathers wanted it. He has never voted for a tax increase, wants to completely do away with the IRS and the payment of Federal Income Tax (which goes 100% to pay the interest on the national debt to the elitist bankers of the Federal Reserve, run the military and pay for the salaries of government workers and officials. Nothing else. Not roads, not education, etc. Those are paid by excise taxes on gasoline, etc). He wants the US to print it's own money backed by gold as is stated in the constitution.

Here is a brief rundown on how he has acted as a responsible, probably the only responsible, member of congress:

He has never voted to raise taxes.

He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.

He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.

He has never voted to raise congressional pay.

He has never taken a government-paid junket.

He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.

He voted against regulating the Internet.

He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.

He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

The truth be told, both parties, as well as the media are afraid of him and do not desire to see him get elected, nor do the major corporations, because if he does, and does not get assassinated in the process, it will be game over for the elitists, the Federal Reserve, the IRS and the lobbiests for the major corporations who buy congressmen and policy.

Is it any wonder that the Republican party of Texas convinced a Democrat to change parties and financed his campaign to the tune of $! million to run against him in Texas?

Will he win? No, as the powers that be will not allow it no matter how popular he is. (But you never know what an "informed" public will do). But he has a very strong following and there are hundreds of thousand of people (if not a few million) who believe in him, support him, and will vote for him.

If one really wants to know what Ron Paul thinks they will read this Personal Message from Ron Paul instead of swallowing hook, line, and sinker what the news media is telling them and then perpetuating those mistruths. Hear it directly from him!

So continue believing, little sheeple, what you read and hear as, whilst you may think you are electing your president, you are NOT (as was proved in 2000). As the Republicans and Democrats are one party with two factions, you will, by not keeping yourself informed, get the president the elitists want and you end up getting the government you deserve by your gullibilness

 

[sabro]

Pachipro, I stick by what I said. If he gets more than 1% of the vote, then expect old copies of the Ron Paul Report, Survival Guide, Newsletter to start circulating around the web with racist right wing rhetoric that anyone short a Klan robe would be quick to distance himself from. They were in all likelihood written by his congressional chief of staff and long time friend... and aren't consistent with Dr. Paul's personal comments and relationships.... but the newsletters bear his name in the masthead and are written in first person point of view. They are pretty ugly... and definitely lowered my opinion of an otherwise fine man.

Unless you are a libertarian, you are not likely to agree with his interpretation of the Constitution, or "how the founding Fathers wanted it run" and aren't likely to want things rolled back to the early 19th century in terms of government role and function. I think we have grown accustom to not only our schools and transportation networks, but our professional fire and police departments as well. Most people like our liberal safety net, like the fact that the government regulates our consumer products, food, water, banking, business practices, and labor conditions, and don't really want to roll back the clock.

I'm not a libertarian. I couldn't see the sense in supporting someone like Dr. Paul.

 

[ArmandV]

The best to you each morning!

 

[centrajapan]

I come from Norway which has strong social democratic traditions. Democrats have more in common with Norway than Republicans. But Democrats suck too and they are not all too anti war either. The socialists have always been strong here. There are lots of good values in social democracy. A good social security, gender equality, BUT I think the government here has too much control. Switzerland is in a way is the economic yang of Norway's state controlled economy. Ron Paul reminds me very much of Swiss values. Very liberal and very capitalistic. And has good points about the economy. He wants to bring the Dollar back to the gold. I do not think thats such a stupid idea. The Swiss are world bankers and they have shite loads of goal therefore their currency is stable.

 

[sabro]

I'm looking at Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution...it gives Congress "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"... but doesn't mention any "gold" standard...

 

[ArmandV]

I'm looking at Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution...it gives Congress "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"... but doesn't mention any "gold" standard...

If taking the dollar off the gold standard is unconstitutional, then FDR would've been impeached.

 

[Pachipro]

Pachipro, I stick by what I said. If he gets more than 1% of the vote, then expect old copies of the Ron Paul Report, Survival Guide, Newsletter to start circulating around the web with racist right wing rhetoric that anyone short a Klan robe would be quick to distance himself from. They were in all likelihood written by his congressional chief of staff and long time friend... and aren't consistent with Dr. Paul's personal comments and relationships.... but the newsletters bear his name in the masthead and are written in first person point of view. They are pretty ugly... and definitely lowered my opinion of an otherwise fine man.

To quote former President Ronald Reagan, "There you go again", spouting what you read and hear from the controlled media. As is mentioned in this story, "Racist Smears Against Ron Paul Exposed" it was completely denounced as a smear perpetrated outside of this country against him and has thus been proven false, but will you hear it on the major news media? Never!

You are free to believe what you want and to "vote" for whom you desire beased on what you believe and I will fight for your right to say so. Just have all the real facts in hand before parroting what the media says.

I'm looking at Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution...it gives Congress "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"... but doesn't mention any "gold" standard...

Gold is the measure which any real currency is printed. Unfortunately, ours is a fiat currency with nothing backing it up. Not even gold anymore. Our money is worthless, nothing, nada, zip. It is just printed at the whim of the Federal Reserve and then we, the taxpayers have to pay it back with interest. They make money from nothing!

Congress no longer has the right to print and coin money. That is now the right of the Federal Reserve (which is neither Federal nor Reserve, but a conglomeration of international banks and bankers that lend money to the US government and they control the printing of it). Mayby you didn't know this. Look it up please. That is no longer a constitutional right of the United States. If tomorrow morning the Federal Reserve said that now all Monopoly money is now legal US tender, then it would be. Plain and simple.

If taking the dollar off the gold standard is unconstitutional, then FDR would've been impeached.

Roosevelt was part of the elite and in on it. Just Google Delano and Roosevelt and you will understand. Back then we were still on the gold standard. It was Nixon who took us off the gold standard (if memory serves me) and started floating the dollar. In reality, today, our dollar is not even worth the paper it is printed on.

This reminds me of something I seen on a Discovery Channel documentary about Roosevelt, or maybe I read it, I can't remember. It was said that Roosevelt said to to his staff one day, paraphrasing, "Raise the price of gold today by 17cents." When asked why, Roosevelt replied, "because I can."

This is getting off topic, let's keep it to the American Election as regardless of what is said or done, America will only get the president the elites select for us and no one else even if they have to rig the electronic voting booths, which is proved to have been done recently.

I still believe that the candidates for President will be:

For the Republicans: McCain/Gulianni.

For the Democrats: Edwards/Clinton.

 

[ArmandV]

Just Google Delano and Roosevelt and you will understand. Back then we were still on the gold standard. It was Nixon who took us off the gold standard (if memory serves me) and started floating the dollar.

I think you may be right that Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard. I remember when dollars used to say "Silver Certificate" instead of "Federal Reserve Note." But FDR did make it illegal for private ownership of gold.

 

[sabro]

I don't think the media has even picked up on the old Ron Paul Newsletters... and I'm not all parrotting what they say (which is nothing), I'm just telling you what will happen if anyone remotely took Dr. Paul seriously. He has significant exposure as a serious candidate and will run well on the fringes. At any rate we do need a change. No Republican really represents that except Ron Paul... but in my liberal mind--- the good Doctor is a change in the wrong direction.

I'm not a libertarian. Nor do I ascribe to the libertarian view of how "the Founding Fathers" wanted us to run our country. They were significantly intelligent enough to build flexibility into the Constitution in my opinion... and the opinion of most conservatives and liberals... in order to have a functional and adaptable government.

Congress is given the constitutional right "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof..." and they do it through the Federal Reserve (like most libertarians would have us believe... privatization is sacred.)... and it has never been a Constitutional requirement to have the dollar on any standard. I was just pointing out the mis-statement about founder's intent.

I think a McCain- Clinton fight in November would be interesting... or perhaps Obama can pull it out. He seems to have the most enthusiastic and genuine supporters... and the most momentum.

 

[Pachipro]

But FDR did make it illegal for private ownership of gold.

You are correct Armand in that the Roosevelt administration authorized the confiscation of all gold bullion and coins, save for numismatic coins, during his reign (which is why when one speaks of "owning gold" it is numismatic coins they are speaking of like $20 St. Gaudins from the early 1900's etc.) These in all liklelihood whill never be confiscated, even today, and that is why the elites and others invest in them as they know they are free from confiscation in a time of crisis. That is the only kind of gold I own.

 

[sabro]

uhhh... Pachipro, you do realize that your source for "debunking" the story linking Ron Paul to racist statements claims the source was "Israeli propagandists"????

Ron Paul did publish those newsletters for 20 years. They supported anti-government militias, the OK city bombers, David Duke, and the Branch Davidians... and strongly criticized Black and Jewish leaders including members of Congress and MLK. They articles had scattered racist references borrowed from other right wing sources. They are still available online for those who can seek them out, in their unaltered entirety... they were published under the Ron Paul name, and he has acknowledged them. What he has said is that he did not write or read every article and he certainly doesn't approve of the content.

 

[centrajapan]

US got twisted opinions on Jews and Israel. It seems as if you dont support israel you are an Anti Semite not knowing that Palestinians are Semites. Israel sucks. But for a president to get elected by the people they have to say. I support Israel. Its their religion.

 

[Pachipro]

I think a McCain- Clinton fight in November would be interesting... or perhaps Obama can pull it out. He seems to have the most enthusiastic and genuine supporters... and the most momentum.

You are quite correct. He has the most momentum and support because the media gives it to him. He is just a senator, and a young one at that and has not even proved himself worthy of running a country. Hillary? What has she done besides run on the coat tails of her husband (even though she may have been the brains behind him)? and then run as a carpetbagger for the NY senate? Why didn't she run in Illinois her "home state"? Was it because she was afraid of losing to Obama? Could be.

Heck, three months ago McCain was broke, taking public transportation and been given up for dead. Look at him now. I have the feeling that McCain is running much as Dole did and may just lose out to the Democrats. Since it is all "decided" beforehand anyway, "they" may just be giving him the nod because he is the most senior republican as Dole was.

IMO I don't believe the American public (in total) is ready yet for either a woman president or a black president, especially given the tough times facing the US today, but having either one as a vice-president? yes I believe they/we are ready.

Who will win Republicans or Democrats? I don't know yet nor do I want to stake a bet on it as it's still to early. In times of economic crisis and war it is usually the Republicans who win, but given that this year is a whole new ballgame, it will be interesting to see who the elites and media select.

Then again, I could be way off base and completely wrong. It will be very interesting these next two weeks that's for sure.

 

[sabro]

I like Dr. Paul. He is honest, hard working and has high ethical standards. I don't support his candidacy because he subscribes to a political philosophy which I find unfavorable. My point is that on a national stage things he wrote and said will come back to haunt him. Life time friends and political associates that he keeps (quite close and is fiercely loyal to) are anti-semites and racists. I don't believe that Dr. Paul is either. I have heard from California Congressmen such as Maxine Waters who defend him on that account and she says not only has she been in his Capitol hill office, but that there is a prominent photo of Dr. King and Rosa Parks in a prominent location. I believe that although many of his friends and supporters loathe Dr. King and all he stands for, Dr. Paul sees himself in the same rugged individualist against the system mode and holds him in high regard.

I am not one for swiftboating however. I will cite my sources and Dr. Paul's rebuttal:
Nice Wikipedia article: Ron Paul 2008 presidential campaign - Wikipedia
(Skip down to controversies for the Newsletter stuff)

The New Republic article that "broke" the story:
Ron Paul's race problem
A congressional collegue/supporter:
New Jersey Politics | NJ Politics | Observer
Sample of blogs:
Ron Paul Racist Statements on CNN 1/10/08

Although it has been lighting up the blogsphere, the mainstream media has been focussing on the front runners and has been ignoring Ron Paul entirely. He rarely gets mentioned on air, and I don't think he is coming to any of the next few debates.

 

[sabro]

I don't know who I will support, but I haven't ruled out Obama. In the current climate, lack of experience is not my biggest concern. He is a senator, has plenty of relevant experience, and many successful Presidents have followed the same type of pattern,

(Paul for instance isn't even a Senator... he is going straight from congressman to the high office, and experience is no issue.)

I'm hoping Edwards is still in play by next week. I'm happy with any of the three actually, but looking and listening to them, Edwards could be my choice.

Although I match well with Hillary's views... I would rather pick someone else.