Why I Donated to Ron Paul Today… and Why You MUST Too!

Comments

32 responses to “Why I Donated to Ron Paul Today… and Why You MUST Too!”

1. 

   andy

   November 5, 2007

   You might reconsider your viewpoints on Ron Paul. Without regurgitating what’s already been said, read this. http://suicidegirls.com/news/politics/22557/

   Reply
2. 

   Donovan

   November 5, 2007

   Congress won’t approve of half of his actions, and if that happens, he’s useless. Compromise and bi-partisan persuasion is the name of the game.

   Reply
3. 

   Hopeful

   November 5, 2007

   Ron Paul may be a fiscal libertarian, but he is definitely not a social libertarian. And that’s a contradiction I can’t live with, so I won’t be supporting him. But I’d love to see a true libertarian run some day.

   Reply
4. 

   Will

   November 5, 2007

   @Donovan – as a pro-freedom president, Ron Paul would actually have a lot more power in promoting freedom than all the statist presidents have in promoting their statist agenda. Most of the agencies in government fall under the executive branch, and as the head of the executive branch he can issue an executive order to them essentially saying “don’t enforce the bad laws”. So during his term, the drug war could effectively come to a stop, people could not be prosecuted for “tax evasion”, he could bring all the troops home, etc.

   @Hopeful – other than his anti-immigration stance (which is the *only* problem I have with him), in what ways is he not a social libertarian?

   Reply
5. 

   Magnus

   November 5, 2007

   He’s going up against the Bilderberg group… he’ll be lucky 🙂

   Reply
6. 

   Carl Zetterlund

   November 5, 2007

   Anything Tynan says, DONE! Just kidding.

   I donated and I’m really shocked that I did. If I did it, then many other people will too.

   I’m not sure if Ron Paul’s ideas are perfect. I know they aren’t because nothing is, but he’s the first politician I have ever really liked and can trust.

   Reply
7. 

   Mike

   November 5, 2007

   Tynan,

   I want to preface this post before I go into my response. First off I will freely admit I am not a political guru. I am knowledge of politics to an extent, but am no expert. I usually keep my political beliefs to myself.

   Secondly, I want to say that I hold you in the highest esteem for what you’ve done in the PUA Community. You seem like a really cool guy.

   But I find some of your political beliefs scary and appalling. Let me emphasize NOT YOU, just your way of thinking politically.

   Let me get into specifics. Part of the reason you are voting for Ron Paul is he getting rid of medicaid?

   I’m sorry, but my father is on Medicaid. He has a heart condition. We can’t afford regular medical insurance. Medicaid helps my father get good medical care and medication. Without that we’d really be up the creek without a paddle.

   I can understand people’s frustrations with welfare. There is a lot of people who abuse the system. But there is also a LOT of people who legitimately need it.

   When I was struggling financially on my own I applied for food stamps. Yes you don’t have to be a parent to get them. I couldn’t fall back on my father at the time due to personal circumstances I prefer not to get into. I was barely able to make rent. And those food stamps saw me through rough times. Now I am back on my feet now thankfully.

   Tynan, again I don’t know you. But from what I recollect, you come from a somewhat privileged background. I am not saying rich, but a stable financial background family-wise.

   I can put myself in your shoes. Understanding how difficult it is emphasizing with people who come from different situations than yourself.

   But still, I think you should try to get all perspectives on specific issues. Before you make a final judgement.

   I hope you understand that I’m offering only constructive criticism here. Otherwise I have a lot of respect for you. To reitenirate, you seem like a cool guy. Just ask that you keep what I said in mind next time you dip your feet into political waters.

   Reply
8. 

   Hayden

   November 5, 2007

   “Congress won’t approve of half of his actions, and if that happens, he’s useless. Compromise and bi-partisan persuasion is the name of the game.”

   The glass is half full my friend! Congress WILL approve HALF of his ideas (at least according to you). Compromise and Bi-partisan Persuasion? Did the founding fathers ‘compromise’? Does George W. Bush compromise? Do you really think the Republicans and Democrats compromise? Seems to me that the Democrats just give GWB all the money that he wants for this insane war.

   This is about electing a man who tells THE TRUTH. At least he really tells you WHAT HE BELIEVES PERSONALLY. Who believes in the Constitution of the United States of America. Since when is that a bad idea.

   “Ron Paul may be a fiscal libertarian, but he is definitely not a social libertarian. And that’s a contradiction I can’t live with, so I won’t be supporting him. But I’d love to see a true libertarian run some day.”

   What does that even mean? Who are you going to vote for then? A fiscally irresponsible social libertarian?

   Yes, he’s Pro-Life. But he’s not going to force states to make abortion illegal. He’d rather leave it up to the states.

   I’m pro-choice. But I’m also anti death penalty, anti big government, anti centralized powers, pro for low taxes, pro for eliminating the IRS, pro for eliminating the Federal Reserve (people, watch this to learn about the Federal Reserve, it’s short: ), and against just printing money OUT OF THIN AIR.

   Yeah, he’s not perfect. He isn’t convinced of global warming. But global warming is potentially going to be taken care of by science and technological advancement in the next 20 years anyway. Read “The Singularity is Near” by Ray Kurzweil if you think otherwise.

   Nothing is guaranteed in this world, but Ron Paul is about smaller government, restoring the Constitution, returning to a sound money policy, eliminating the inflation tax, protecting the borders, ending the War in Iraq, PRE-EMPTIVELY ending the future war in Iran, and PRE-EMPTIVELY ending the war in….. well who the fuck know who the Republicans or War Hawk Democrats are going to attack in the future.

   He’s not perfect. But Hillary, Edwards, Obama, Giuliani, Romney, McCain, and Thompson…. These guys are PERFECT?

   Hillary – http://youtube.com/watch?v=qggO5yY7RAo
   She’s evil
   Obama – Won’t end the war by the end of his first term.
   Edwards – Won’t end the war by the end of his first term.

   Hilary’s probably going to get the nomination and THERE’S SO MUCH NOT TO LIKE ABOUT HER.

   As for the Republicans?

   Giuliani – He’s wrong about EVERYTHING. He didn’t read the 9/11 commission report, his own daughter is supporting Obama, and he basically is going to be as bad or WORSE than George W. Bush. He’s just a neo-con and more of the same.

   Romney – He was pro-choice, then pro-life. He’s pro-war with Iraq, Iran, pro-first nuclear strike. The guy is soooooooooo fake it’s not even funny. But he “looks” Presidential. Get a life if you support guy.

   McCain – pro-war, pro-war, pro-war. No chance at winning the nomination AT ALL at this point. No one’s donating to his campaign, the trend is not with him, and after 8 years of sucking up to George W. Bush, can you really take this “maverick” seriously any more.

   Fred Thompson – Who is Fred Thompson? His performance at the last debate (his only debate) was a JOKE. He didn’t know what he was talking about and mumbled most of the time. He’s pro-war and quite frankly, if you think Fred Thompson is the bee-knees then you probably don’t read BTYB anyway.

   As far as I can tell it’s going to be Hilary vs. Giuliani. And frankly, I’ll take Ron Paul over those two any day of the week.

   And Hilary, Obama, and John Edwards will not get us out of Iraq. Watch this video.
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=yPiBWU57jAA

   If you REALLY want out of Iraq and this stupid war, Ron Paul is our only hope. Otherwise, just expect to be there for another 4 to 8 years. Beware the Government that Rules By Fear

   Reply
9. 

   Donovan

   November 5, 2007

   Hayden, I can see what your saying with some of the candidates. As far as Romney goes, I don’t mind him at all. Actually I respect him alot for his business skills, and results driven approaches.

   He was pro-choice, then pro-life. Come on, thats a pretty naive few point. He was “pro-choice” because he respected his states laws on abortion, and promised not to change them if he was elected governor? He’s always been pro-life, he just doesn’t let his personal beliefs dictate what the majority of the electorate want.

   That seems like a good leader to me.

   That whole flip-flop bullshit is ridiculous, any good leader should change his/her opinions depending on the current evidence/circumstances. If GWB had some of that, we might not be stuck in Iraq.

   Having said all that, I agree that it will be between Guiliani and Clinton. I’d much rather Guiliani. Clinton gives me a weird vibe.

   Reply
10. 

    B-Runn

    November 5, 2007

    Tynan
    I can see where your coming from in terms of putting the money back in the peoples hands, I even agree with one of your last posts about making all drugs legal and letting stupid people do them if they want to. The problem is, the majority of americans aren’t that smart and I don’t mean that to be insulting(I’m Canadian), its just the truth. And its not entirely their fault. The problem with putting the money back in the peoples hands is that that same money is being put back into the hands of large corporations who make it their job to try and manipulate people into buying their products and services. I don’t mean this in a conspiracy theory way, its just the basics of advertising, one person has a product and wants others to buy it, so they make every effort to make the public buy that product. Given the trends of rising obesiety and overconsumption of goods and services, it seems like the american people lack the self discipline to really be given control of all the money they earn. All in all it can really be boiled down to one statement, do you think the average american living paycheque to paycheque is going to put money in a savings account in the off chance they might have a heart attack in 15 years, or will they use that money to buy a new plasma TV.

    Reply
11. 

    Hayden

    November 6, 2007

    “it seems like the american people lack the self discipline to really be given control of all the money they earn…. do you think the average american living paycheque to paycheque is going to put money in a savings account in the off chance they might have a heart attack in 15 years, or will they use that money to buy a new plasma TV.”

    What kind of insane thinking is this? An individual on this planet cannot be allowed to keep the works of his labor because he’s “too stupid.”? A very intelligent and responsible individual, havs to be taxed at exorbitant rates (and they are and will become even more exorbitant) because another individual has less discipline? I have to be forced to be generous? What kind of insanity is that?

    Do you know where my taxes are going right now? To corporations like Haliburton. To a war in Iraq so that oil companies can get rich. A war that had been planned for YEARS BEFORE 9/11. Why are my taxes going to CORRUPTION and WARS? Because that is what individuals in power do. Power corrupts people. And the free market is 10000x more intelligent than a bunch of people with law degrees planning everything at the top. Governments CANNOT CREATE anything. All they can do is take money from one group of people and give it to another. They usually spend it on wars, defense, etc. It is always the common man, under the guise of safety, defense, respect for the poor and unprivileged, and alarming fear for his or her own personal way of life that is told, “You cannot keep the fruits of your labor. Though you are smart enough to earn your wage, you are not intelligent enough to spend it. It is your responsibility to work 4 to 5 months out of the year FOR THE GOVERNMENT.”

    As far as the obesity epidemic in America, in my estimation, it has already been shown that HUGH CORN SUBSIDIES are responsible for a huge portion of Obesity in America. When 1 food is subsidized for soooooo long and EVERYTHING on the American plate is now or has been raised on CORN (colas, sugar, ketchup, pop tarts, chickens, eggs, cattle, pig, milk, etc.) the human body simply stores fat because IT DOESN’T WANT MORE CORN. High Fructose Corn Syrup is evil (and it makes Coca-Cola not taste as good as when it was sweetened with sugar cane) and its existence is due to Americans being too “Dumb” to spend their own money, giving it to some “Smart” politicians, who then give it to corn farmers who then make soooooo much corn than it’s in EVERYTHING. Subsidies are some of the most evil transferences of wealth an ill health that there ever were.

    If Americans are too dumb to spend their own money, why do you want to give it to our politicians? Do you really think these individuals are so much more enlightened and nuanced then the rest of the populace?

    Reply
12. 

    Matt

    November 6, 2007

    A lot of people here appear to be confused on where Ron Paul stands. I don’t have time to tackle them all, but I’ll answer one that is easy.

    Mike: Ron Paul has stated several times that his plan is to wean the younger generation off of the social services provided by the Fed. He said he will make sure people who are reliant on the services will be fully covered. His voting record shows this (he has never voted on any of the resolutions to spend the alloted money elsewhere).

    Everyone else: If you really oppose Ron Paul at least take the time to fully understand his positions. It seems to me he is the only candidate with viable solutions to the most pressing problems we are facing (foreign policy, economy, civil liberties).

    Reply
13. 

    Will

    November 6, 2007

    Thanks for this post, Ty. I donated $344 yesterday myself. Ty, if you’re going to donate the max $2300 you should do it asap. It will help them buy advertising more effectively if they have more money as soon as possible, so they can get the best rates (and therefore be able to get more advertising) in the early primary states and make sure to actually secure the ad time.

    Reply
14. 

    B-Runn

    November 7, 2007

    Hayden,
    The reason why your tax dollars go to the war in iraq and to haliburton is BECAUSE of the free market environment in the US. The reason why lobbyists for companies like haliburton can push so hard in washington to make sure your tax dollars go to the war is because of the amount of money they have backing them. Thats where the corruption comes from. The american government cannot make decisions that are in the interest of the people because of the amount of financial backing that comes from companies with strong political agendas. It isn’t fare to say governments can’t create anything just because the current american system appears that way. If you look at examples of countries with some of the highest standards of living anywhere in the world, where poverty is almost non existant and there is little unemployment, you’ll see that these countries have the highest tax rates and strictist governing bodies(Switzerland, Sweden, Norway etc.). Tynan talks of Ron Paul’s beliefs in personal responsibility above, wouldn’t part of a persons personal responsibility be to make sure the lifestyle they live in is maintained by maintaining the society they live in?

    Its very true that taxes given to the current american government will not benefit the people. Which is why I can see people backing a candidate like Ron Paul. I just don’t think america as a country is ready for the ideas he has in mind. It would just cause a larger rift between the rich and the poor.

    And in terms of obiesety, blaming corn subsidies is like reading the last page of a book and thinking you know the whole story. Sure a lot of what we eat today is corn based, but really thats just the tip of the iceberg. What about the sedentary lifestyle lead by most working adults that involves waking up, driving to work, sitting all day, and then coming home to watch TV and go to bed. Or how in gym class in grade school, being overweight is now considered an excuse to get out of certain activities? What about the multi-million dollar ad campains produced by companies like Coca-Cola to make us want all these horrible products. Although I do agree with you on the amount of corn people eat, I really don’t think that is the problem.

    Finally I do think that politicians are more enlightened than the populace, THATS WHY WE ELECT THEM. Frankly if the politicians are wasting your money and doing a poor job, its your fault, not theirs.

    Reply
15. 

    Andrew

    November 7, 2007

    Hey very cool, I donated some money last night. Good to see a Ron Paul post from you Tynan. Anyways, I think a lot of the time when people hear about him wanting to abolish all these federal programs they get scared that they wouldn’t be replaced with anything.

    While I do think that almost complete privatization could take place for every gov agency, it wouldn’t at first. Education would just be shifted to the states.

    Food and drug control wouldn’t go away, it would just be ‘endoresed’ by more Protection Companies. These companies already exist, but if we didn’t pay billions of tax dollars to the government to do it for us, there would be more companies doing it.

    Ron Paul 2008!

    Andrew Ford

    Reply
16. 

    Albert Meyer

    November 7, 2007

    Tynan,

    The naysayers don’t understand Paul’s positions. I bet they have not watch a proper interview between, say, C-Span or PBS and Ron Paul. You can tell from their comments. (The C-span and PBS interviews were particularly good. The FOX interviews are really awful. If FOX (Hannity and Limbaugh) hates you must be doing something right.) Had they done they would know that he has no desire to scrap Medicaid as one person suggested. Your summary of Ron Paul is spot on. We admire the man for his integrity, his consistency and his humility. He is the real thing. He cares about us. He is not your average political hack who tells you something and then says, “read my lips.” He doesn’t take money from corporations. He doesn’t even take money for himself. He declined his Congressional pension. He has never taken a political junket. Lobbyist don’t bother to knock on his door. We’ve never had a candidate like this. It is true that a President cannot do much on his own without the help of Congress, but as Paul pointed out in an interview yesterday, when the nation speaks, as it does in a presidential election, the folk in DC get the message. Thanks again. Ron Paul rocks!

    Reply
17. 

    June

    November 7, 2007

    Tynan,

    Thanks for donating to Ron Paul. I think you’ve made a good investment. From some of the comments posted here though, it seems your readers aren’t able to separate Ron Paul’s personal views from his policy views.

    Yes, he does personally oppose abortion, and a few other things I disagree with, but more importantly he wants to stop the Federal government from telling the states whether or not they will allow or forbid such things. He wants to devolve power to the state and local level. And the more locally critical decisions are made the easier it is to have your voice heard.

    Perhaps more importantly there will be choices within the boundaries of the U.S. Don’t like the abortion (or whatever)agenda in your state — move to another. You’ll still be a US citizen with all the rights enshrined in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. And Ron is the only candidate from either party who can promise you that those documents will truly be respected.

    Reply
18. 

    chuckles

    November 7, 2007

    Move if you wish be sure to vote!

    Reply
19. 

    Tynan

    November 7, 2007

    Hey guys… thanks a lot for your comments. You definitely did a better job explaining why he’s so awesome than I did.

    Tynan

    Reply
20. 

    Kristen in Peru

    November 7, 2007

    Mike- Don’t be such a suck up; if you have an opinion, state it with confidence.

    Tynan- I didn’t know too much about Ron Paul before the past few months, and I’m not one to typically get into politics, but I have to say that the discussion this post has started is definitely making me want to find out more.

    Hayden makes some good points- the government shouldn’t be our babysitter. If American’s are typically “too stupid” to figure out a way to provide for their future- let them struggle. If the older generation is dependant on these services, that’s understandable- they’ve been counting on having them their whole life, so we can’t just take that away from them. However, the younger generation can certainly adapt. If we’re allowed to keep more of the money we work for, we can save the difference between our old salary and our new one and put that in savings. So if you’re one of the people who wants social security- you can create your own! Right? It makes perfect sense to me, that is, if I’m understanding this all.

    I do have a few questions though, to anyone who can answer them: What about all of the services taxes provide funding for, like building new roads and schools, or paying for postal workers, firefighters, animal shelters, residential hospitals, etc? If things like that become privatized, don’t they have a really high potential of being corrupted?

    I don’t know much about any of that stuff, and never cared before, but now that I can vote I want to start paying more attention. So if anyone wants to correct, criticize, or inform me on anything, I’m curious to your opinions and suggestions.

    Reply
21. 

    Matt

    November 7, 2007

    Kristen:

    Not *all* services you listed would be privatized. Some would stay in the Fed and some the states would be responsible for. For example, states can decide to pay for education and healthcare if they choose. Ron Paul’s stance is basically that the Fed has no authority to run most of these programs (by article 10 of the Constitution), not necessarily that they should not exist.

    Income tax doesn’t pay for as much as you might think. Roads, for example, are paid for with taxes on gasoline and before the income tax there was a corporate excise tax to fund the military. With his plans more money would also stay in individual states than there is right now.

    Reply
22. 

    Matt

    November 7, 2007

    Oops. I meant the 10th Amendment to the Constitution:

    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

    There is no article 10.

    Reply
23. 

    Tynan

    November 7, 2007

    Mike,

    Ron Paul’s plan is to let people who are already dependent on these programs keep the benefits, but to wean the new people off of them.

    I PERSONALLY don’t believe that there should be programs like welfare because I don’t think that they solve PROBLEMS. I think they solve symptoms.

    In general (obviously not in all cases), these programs promote people to stay on welfare. Getting a job makes them ineligible. I’ve read accounts of people in the welfare subculture who talk about the flaws in the system.

    Instead I’d like to see people keep more of their money so that they can save for hard times. If you don’t save… it’s YOUR problem.

    That isn’t to say that people don’t need help sometimes. I borrowed money from my parents one time. I wouldn’t have died without it, but it made my life much easier.

    With no taxes there would be more money in families as well as charity organizations which could be given (or loaned) WILLINGLY to people, rather than the government playing robin hood. A great example of something like this are the microloan programs going on in other countries. These solve PROBLEMS and don’t create dependence.

    I guess some people don’t share my view here, but I believe that there’s such thing as acceptable losses. If someone can’t cut it in society… that’s fine. Some gazelles in the pack get eaten by hyenas.

    I want policies that will enable people to have the most freedom to do what they want, while encumbering them as little as possible.

    At the same time, I really do like helping people and want success for people. I just don’t want the government to mandate how and when I have to help people.

    Tynan

    Reply
24. 

    Dova

    November 9, 2007

    Seth: I’d rather waste my vote on someone I do support than sell my own values short by voting for someone I don’t care about. Caring about something, and sharing that view with others, is the only way to ever change anything.

    It’s nothing like the war in Iraq because this is something that’s in our control. Sure you’re single vote won’t always matter. But those single votes add up. If everyone who didn’t vote in ’00 or ’04, because they thought their vote didn’t matter, would have voted anyway, we would be looking at a different person in the White House.

    To say “Nothing you do about politics will change anything, ever,” is far more naive than stating what you believe in the form of a vote. Countries are founded and destroyed by people caring about politics. How is that changing nothing?

    We are the hungry masses. If we don’t let them know it we’ll stay hungry forever.

    Reply
25. 

    Tristan

    November 10, 2007

    Tynan, I havent been to your site in ages though I used to be a frequent visitor, and its funny, I didnt expect to come back and find that your a Ron Paul fan but now that I think about it, his political philosophy of liberty and personal responsibility totally clicks with your philosophy on how to live life, everyone should check out this great documentary on the wasteful welfare/warfare state called John Stossel goes to Washington, it has Ron Paul in it briefly and its really good at explaining why govt is so inefficient when it goes beyond its basic responsibilities http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEsUQBWFzK8 lastly, please excuse my poor punctuation, apostrophe and periods dont work since I spilled beer on my keyboard

    Reply
26. 

    Ben

    November 10, 2007

    “We are the hungry masses. If we don’t let them know it we’ll stay hungry forever.” -Dova

    Dova, you can scream at the top of your lungs, but it won’t produce any tangible result. You are a rat in a cage with the illusion of control. Political change happens, but you have nothing to do with it. Are you Martin Luther King, Jr? Are you leading a revolution? NO. Unless you’re going to go all out, just stay home. Your opinion is worthless, because someone else with the opposite opinion will just cancel you out. Think how powerful MLK Jr. was. He BARELY tipped the scale in favor of black people, there were so many powerful white people fighting him. And you think anything you do effects national politics? Not even close.

    Anyway, wtf are you hungry for? I’m not hungry. I feel great.

    Reply
27. 

    Walter

    November 12, 2007

    I’m eurotrash so I don’t care either way but for all Ron Paul supporters out there:

    http://www.teaparty07.com

    Reply
28. 

    Truth

    November 13, 2007

    Ron Pauls’ homophobia, war against the working class, and racial insensitivity, if not his racism, are on full view in his congressional legislative record:

    http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html

    Reply
29. 

    Instinct

    November 19, 2007

    Please don’t believe the Ron Paul haters. They don’t know what they are talking about. Ron Paul wants to abolish the Federal Reserve!! Think about that. The governments ultimate power to tax the poor! The Federal Reserve has the power to pump money and create inflation to bail out rich speculators. What do poor people need? Food, fuel, and housing, and education. The cost of these services have been rising anywhere from 300% to 3000% in value over the past few years. Almost all of these services are not included when they calculate inflation!!!! They fake the inflation numbers so the Federal Reserve can cut interest rates and pump money into the reserve banking system to cause assest values to rise for speculators (the rich). This also causes gas, food, shelter, etc. to rise, therefore to tax (the poor). In case your wondering. I am a speculator!! Its what I do for a living. Everyone I know in this industry is scared to death of this guy.
    He would acually would bring balance to the distrubution of wealth to all people. We would prosper amazingly. Unfortunalty, people like me would have to work, save, and invest instead of speculate to become wealthy if we move to a hard currency. But I feel its a small price to pay to drastically reduce the gap between the poor and the rich. You would have be a fool not to vote for him, (unless you are a wealthy speculator).

    Reply
30. 

    bob

    November 23, 2007

    It won’t work.
    here is why:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McNo62gpw6M

    Reply
31. 

    jmsb

    December 3, 2007

    glad to see my favorite pickup artist behind Ron Paul!

    go ron go!

    Reply
32. 

    Murphy

    December 5, 2007

    So does this mean you’ve decided to vote Tynan?

    Reply