Slashdot Mirror

Because people can't donate more than once. The poster is slightly conflating several things, though. Ron Paul raised money from about 38,000 donors on November 5, totaling somewhere around $4.2 million. Last quarter, however, he raised something like $5.3 million, and something like $2.8 the quarter before that.

This quarter, he's already raised $10.7 million or so (rising daily), with that $4.2 million being part of this. I'm not sure the number of individual donors for the entire quarter is known to the general public, but it's probably more than 40,000. Also, the average donation size on Nov. 5 was about $110.

Seee http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ and http://www.ronpaulgraphs.com/ for more information.

I personally don't like online distribution because unlike static optical disks, the DRM format owner can wreck it at any time they want, and I don't want to go to the trouble to convert everything to a real format.

BTW
"I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore"
Have you looked at Ron Paul?

I like a lot of what Ron Paul stands for, but his stance on healthcare is a deal breaker for me. If "promote the general Welfare" can't be reasonably and trivially interpreted to mean the health of the citizens, then it never meant anything in the first place as far as I'm concerned.

Because of Paul's present declared stance on healthcare, my vote will go to Kucinich. If Paul becomes more enlightened on this issue (which I doubt, as this is a matter of considerable self-interest to him), I'd be very pleased to vote for him.

While I agree with Paul that the present government mismanagement of healthcare is reprehensible, I don't think that means that the best way to handle it is to let the individual citizen play Russian Roulette.

Sadly, electing a president is only a fraction of what needs be done, and the races in the senate and house do not get the attention they need to elect candidates that would let a president actually accomplish a serious reform platform they were elected on. Assuming such a president can even be elected, which is optimistic to say the least.

think of how all the news channels seem to have determined that Hillary is the winner

What I've heard most recently is Obama is ahead of Hillary in some polls.

Falcon

If you love freedom vote for Ron Paul

Not true. Vote for Ron Paul.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

You should check him out! You'd like what you see. Ron Paul is pro-freedom. You like freedom, don't you?

www.ronpaul2008.com

vote Ron Paul for president!

The Constitution says nothing about Internet privacy, so Ron Paul would leave that issue to local control or the free market. Consider his position on the FDA -- he says that it's not necessary for any government body to ensure that drugs or supplements are safe because people will stop buying from companies that sell dangerous ones. Such a president wouldn't care if Google is snooping your search results -- they'd tell you to deal with it or use some other search engine.

That's correct. Ron Paul's only concern as president would be protecting your privacy from invasion by the Federal government. If he were running for a position in the state government, he would be concerned with protecting your privacy from invasion by the state government. If he were running for a position on the Google board of directors, he would presumably be concerned with protecting your privacy from invasion by Google. That his concern is limited in scope to the areas that the job he's applying for authorizes him to act within is not a vice, but a virtue. It is precisely this approach of his that makes him the most desirable candidate out there for many people. The point of electing the President of the United States is not to choose the person who will have unlimited power over us for the next four years, but to choose the person who will do the best job while staying within the boundaries defined by the Constitution. The proper way to expand the power of the President is by amending the Constitution.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/85/federalizing-social-policy/

He's -=personally=- pro-life, but is politically pro-choice.

Except for the parts of the Constitution he doesn't like, and wants to amend, as he admits on his own website.

He's also rabidly pro-life. While I won't argue the merits of Roe vs. Wade, the majority of American courts have considered a woman's right to choose a fundamental Constitutional right for 30 years. Perhaps he's only pro-Constitution on issues you care about?

Except these Constitutional rights.

Except these Constitutional rights.

Except these Constitutional rights.

Except these Constitutional rights.

Ron Paul's stance on Privacy and Personal Liberty.

"The biggest threat to your privacy is the government. We must drastically limit the ability of government to collect and store data regarding citizens' personal matters."

I encourage anyone who cares about privacy (and many other issues) to look into voting for Ron Paul.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/privacy-and-personal-liberty/

No, of course he isn't perfect but atleast he is different.

Except that the so-called small government Republicans have been busy enlarging the government lately. In fact, only one Republican candidate for president has seriously advocated a smaller government - Ron Paul.

Forget forefathers, I've got fathers and older brothers and sisters in law and my mom to deal with as well as an example to set for my son and nephews. In my family, your vote is your ticket to participate in any political discussion. If you don't vote, you're not allowed to participate in those conversations.

Valuable or no, a vote is sometimes the only opportunity to voice your opinions. This is especially true in my family.

These days, I think Ron Paul is our best hope. It's refreshing to see a politician with consistent, principled integrity (to quote John Stewart).

Ron Paul Ok... show you a candidate... Oh yeah, http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Because I, you know, can think of one Congressman who seems to recognize the value of the internet.

Anyway, the excesses of the Bush administration are going to be cured by the next Republican President. Sure, the liberals whine about lost liberties, but (sadly) only the Republicans have the spine to actually step up and do something about it.

That eliminates any of the Republican candidates for 2008, doesn't it?

No, there's still one Republican that gets it, Ron Paul!

It's a bit depressing but I don't even know how we're supposed to fight this kind of thing. Protesting seems useless. So I throw money at the only candidate who seems vociferously against this whenever I can

It's very creepy to me that the only candidates the media takes seriously are the ones who will give us more of the same. It's creepier still that so many people are okay with that. And there's such a predetermined mindset about the elections they almost seem beside the point.

Is it possible for a popular outsider like Ron Paul to be taken seriously by the media or the country? Is there any room for actual change?

Like I said, I put my money on it, but is there anything else a person can do?

if commercial sets are too tame, there's always the internets (note archive.org link)

buy chemicals here (...while you can -- the feds are actively working to shut this guy down)

btw, chemistry sets were lame even 30 years ago. the chemicals they came with were things like alum, lime, aspirin, melting salt

and a link to click on if you fear your government more than terrorism (vote in the PRIMARY dammit -- before the repub. machine grinds up Paul and spits him out; like the dem. machine did to howard dean)

He is running as a Republican, but his ideas are far more conservative than those of any other candidate. He can truthfully be considered as a conservative libertarian. Read on:

He supports the repeal of the USA PATRIOT Act and all other recent legislation that has passed despite questionable constitutional merit. The restoration of our civil liberties is at the top of his agenda and he will work to disassemble the fascist workings that are currently gaining steam.

He supports sound economic policy, which is something that often seems ignored by every other federally elected official. He would end deficit spending and force the congress to stick to a budget.

He supports the end of political corruption and does not believe that congress should be allowed to continue channeling government funds to their corporate bedfellows.

He ardently supports the Constitution and the Bill of Rights which it contains. He has voted "no" thousands of times during his 10 terms in the House of Representatives, refusing to approve any measure which violates the spirit of the Constitution.

Please, read more about this guy. He's very smart, very honest, and very serious about turning this government around.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

If this trend of losing liberties concerns you, I suggest you research Ron Paul and his positions. He is the only Republican candidate who is committed to reducing the government regulations and protecting personal liberties. The others all seem intent on continuing down the same path G.W. Bush has been, and the leading Democrats do not look much better.

Who is Ron Paul? http://www.ronpaul2008.com

Just in case you weren't aware, Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate who dares to espouse a message of peace, liberty, and constitutionality. This is why both sides of the false dilemma (AKA the Left and the Right) are speaking volumes by ignoring and/or trying to marginalize him. However, he continues to raise substantial funds and his message is being heard.

If the current state of affairs makes you sick, you owe it to yourself to check Dr. Paul out -- he's the cure. Spread his message to everyone you know, and do what you can to help. As an aside, this is the first time in my life I have ever participated in the process and the people I've met through the local Meetup group have been wonderful to say the least.

Oh come on. The federal government is certainly responsible for at least a portion of the funding SWAT teams and 911 systems. It is definitely responsible for the "war on drugs". And as far as the "war on terror" goes, again come on. In fact the "war on drugs" and the "war on terror" were the "both" that I was referring to.

As far as his speeches being infantile. I have to disagree. He is principled and coherent. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. Perhaps the "debates", which are nothing but advertisements for Rudy and company. Anyway, I would urge you to read some of his writings or perhaps look up "Freedom is Popular" on YouTube.

Ron Paul is the last best chance for restoring liberty in our country. He will win if we vote for him, and if he doesn't I see very little difference between any of the other candidates running for government. They all intend to use the state to impose their will upon us.

"It would be a great change of pace to American politics to have two pro-choice candidates."

"I gave in and donated to Ron Paul"

Can't quite work out whether you are pro-choice or not. Anyway you might be interested in Ron Paul's position:-

"The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle. In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. " (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/

> Show me where RP wants to restrict immigration.
easy...
> 2. Enforce existing laws against illegal immigration.
there ya go

check his campaign web site as well:
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/border-security-and-immigration-reform/

He wants immigrants from all countries to face (the same) delays and procedures. Currently some country (Canada) don't have delays, you can get a TN in 3 minutes at the border. I highly doubt this is the standard he has in mind when he says immigrants should face (the same) delays and procedures, therefore he plans to toughen procedures on Canadians.

Even those who voted for Ron Paul?

Nowadays, there is very little difference between Democrats and Republicans in American politics. The once conservative Republican party has been hijacked by the neo-conservatives, which are basically paleo-liberals incognito. If you listen to the rhetoric of either party, the words are 90% the same. This is because a plurality of the members of both parties subscribe to the "politcially elite" beliefs of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Personally, I don't want a North American Union; I despise the IRS, the UN, and the Federal Reserve. In short, vote for Ron Paul.

I doubt Ron Paul will be watching this one CFR propaganda.

Don't forget Ron Paul (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/). He is the only presidential candidate who has a 100% constitutional voting record.

• He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
• He voted against the Patriot Act.
• He voted against regulating the Internet.

Hey, he may not be perfect, but he's a pretty decent alternative to the other people who'd like to be in the oval office.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

a certain intelligence report that came out a few years ago saying that the greatest threat to U.S. security is internal?

When you keep that little morsel in mind, it's quite easy to see why the government is so rabidly trying to compartmentalize everyone.

Ron Paul is the cure.

Maybe it could be equipped with a gatlin-gun style rubber band shooter. Or cold water squirt gun. Fly it over the beach and squirt the sunbathers! Liberty is paramount. Go ahead with it, maybe in a few years we will need it to protect us from our own government here in the US. I'm voting for Ron Paul. It's time we remove our military presence from the Middle East and other places abroad. It is our meddeling in middle eastern affairs that is the cause of the 9/11 attacks. It is our continued presence that is doing little more than grow the recruiting rosters of Alcaida. Of course that's good for military companies like Haliburten (spellingn?). http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ And if you're impatient for the next election like I am, visit http://www.impeachbush.org/ to bring an end to George's Un-Constitutional behavior. My little Ron Paul Page is here: http://www.dcresearch.com/ronpaul Join the Revolution!

You don't ... get what I was saying, do you?

You dislike liberal stereotypes and bitch about them. The definition of liberalism is actually quite broad, and as I said before, when you toss any sort of generalizations around, you're being an asshole (you know that, though, don't you?)

It'd be like saying "I hate conservatives because they're all self-centered hipo-christian rednecks who love Nascar, McDonald's, and senseless war."

Ron Paul is liberal, and we're talking about a man who wants to abolish the income tax. Just because he's running for the republican nomination doesn't mean he's "conservative" -- have you ever looked up the libertarian platform?

My political ideas are more similar to classical liberalism than the perverted democratic party platform that you're so used to associating liberals with, since America is filled with idiots who never consider third party candidates.

Also, why do you "dislike their atheism?" Out of curiosity -- I'm agnostic, and while I think atheists can sometimes be foolish, they make the same sort of ridiculous and self-righteous assumptions about the universe that judeo-christians do.

The question is: Would you like the next administration to have unsupervised warrant-less wiretapping capabilities? What if the administration was run by Hillary Clinton? Would you trust her to use it properly and not abuse it.

You make a good point. It's like the government is a big Chess game to them and we are all the pawns.

If you haven't heard by now (you probably live in a cave), you should check out: Ron Paul

Vote Ron Paul 2008.