[Daovonnaex]

Ruxpercnd Ruxpercnd:

Now. I would think Canadians would appreciate the isolationists views of Ron Paul. Besides John McCain, Ron Paul is about the only guy that would take aim at the military-industrial complex.

How would John McCain take aim at the military-industrial complex? John McCain never met a war he didn't like, and he was calling for a ground invasion of Serbia in 1997.

While I know Paul would slash defense spending, I wish he'd offer more specific plans as to how he plans on doing it either than pulling in our horns from overseas. Would he kill the useless, dangerous V-22 Osprey for instance?

Ruxpercnd Ruxpercnd:

Now. I would think Canadians would appreciate the isolationists views of Ron Paul.
However, Ron Paul wants to severly lower income taxes. And, I know how much Canadians like heavy taxation. So, I guess there is a difference.

The alleged Canadian love of taxation is bogus. Canada's tax rates are much lower than Western Europe and broadly comparable to the US. And FYI, Ron Paul wants to eliminate the income tax.

WBenson WBenson:

The reason Ron Paul gets so much money is because the only people who could afford and would benefit from his presidency are the wealthy. I've never met a poor Libertarian.

The average contribution to Ron Paul is $101 or so. Most libertarians are middle class. The truly rich benefit greatly from Big Government and would certainly not like to see it disappear. People often forget that capitalism was originally a system for the little guy, which over time has been perverted by a corporate-state alliance into a much different kind of system.

[paisley_cross]

Ruxpercnd Ruxpercnd:

However, look at Ron Paul's policies. Would he not make America more palatable for Canadians? Less aggressive foreign policy, etc.

Ripping up trade deals would make the Council of Canadians (aka The Council of Anti-Americans) jump for joy and business predict a depression.

[Toro]

I saw this on another forum

$1:

OK, I saw the good doctor on Meet the Press.

He's against government spending, except when it comes to earmarks for his district.

He's for term limits, except with respect to his own 18 year term.

He's a "repub" who says Ronald Reagan was a failure, GHWB a cipher, he didn't vote for GWB. But he's running as Repub because the libertarian party can't win an election.

Hang the poor out to dry, take away the safety net for our old.

And he's a dangerous SOB.... citizenship not by birth?!?!?!?! Gee... how much Jew blood will a "citizen" be allowed to have with good ole Ronnie?

He's a "constitutionalist" who wants to amend the constitution to divest people of their citizenship.

No wonder the white supremacists love him.

I watched this episode of Meet the Press. Its dead on.

[ryan29]

but is Ron Paul really a serious threat to win the republic nomination or any of the early primaries in iowa or other early states ?

noticed he has alot of internet support but not sure that is the same at voting party member level in the states . just my thoughs not an american political follower really .

[kevlarman]

He could be a serious threat. To the republicans and even the presidency should his campaign keep gaining traction. If he tones down the anti-war rhetoric and pumps up the "cleaning up our own house" message he is espousing than he might very well win it all.

But the bigger a threat he becomes, the more likely someone will dig up dirt on him. The kind of dirt that doesn't just slander it kills presidential runs. And ALL those politicians have those kinds of skeletons in their closets.

My main point with Ron Paul being that yes, he has popular support amongst Americans. Especially those Americans who view themselves as Independant's first and Dem's or Rep's second. But since it doesn't look like he'll play with the banks, small handful of rich families and corporations that actually run America then he's not likely to get much farther.

He's still a great VP choice for either Democrats or Republicans.

[Igloo]

he may not win this election he may or will not even contest for it but if the americans follow the route of the same ol same ol that the front runners are pushing. next election the yanks will be crying for it.


as an aside


heres the flow chart for jobs

canada to the us from political pressure from the unions
from the us to mexico because of the cost of wages
and from mexico to china due to the large worker pool and disposable population and the screwability of its people.

[Sargasso]

The concept of the NAU has certainly been propelled by a number of think tanks over the past 30 years. SPP is only the most recent version of an old agenda.

A good synopsis of the timeline can be found here.

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/staticpages/ ... 0133702539

Personally I think the momentum for this is losing steam (Assuming a moderate republican or any democrate is elected in the US in 2008)

As far as Ron Paul goes I'm for his libertarian approach to foriegn policy, monetary reform and personal freedoms, however getting there from here is bound to be a major battle as he will be up against powerful adversaries who've worked systematically for over a century to establish the control they have of the US government and economy.

A good primer on libertarianism can be found here:

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/newliberty.asp (also available as an audio book)

Pauls position on monetary reform is born of this perspective: Money as Debt

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 2583451279

Enjoy