Wednesday, 31 October 2007
Tuesday, 30 October 2007
read more digg story
Monday, 29 October 2007
Watch the video:
read more digg story
Sunday, 28 October 2007
Saturday, 27 October 2007
Friday, 26 October 2007
Here is one answer BobW gave in the forum-section, which discribes the uniqueness of this social movement:
Maybe we're just not classifiable
On October 26th, 2007 BobW says:
"I'm only a "Republican" because I registered as one so I can vote for Paul in the primary. But then I'm not a Democrat either, as I don't favor socialism, illegal immigration, or government enforced racial discrimination (a.k.a. "affirmative action"). On fiscal policy both parties are hopeless -- tax and spend (Democrats) or borrow and spend (Republicans). On foreign policy both parties seem to accept the notion that it is our country's job to play world cop.
Ron Paul is attracting a lot of people who have no place else to go.
"I love that answer! I`ve got to blog it!
"Ron Paul is attracting a lot of people who have no place else to go."
As a German citizen living in Munich, Bavaria, I`m so desperately longing for real liberty, that I know of no politician worth my simpathy and energy more than that old doctor from Texas. And by doing as much as a "meaningless" individual from abroad can do promoting a foreign longshot republican abroad and telling my german friends, who have never heard of him, that that guy could be the single most "big hope" for what we used to dream of: peace in the world - I meet the craziest, warmest, most diverse, energized, humorus, gentle, toughtfull, respectfull, tolerant (!) bunch of people on earth: the brillant wrighters and commentators of dailypaul.com.
You guys are the best. It is an honour as a fellow human being and concerned citizen of the world to witness your efforts.
Our goal is simple: to win the Colorado caucus on February 5 by getting Ron Paul grassroots supporters into the neighborhoods and winning the 3500 neighborhood precincts that will be meeting that night. Our use of the Internet is mainly organizational though we are compiling some issues information for those who are still making up their minds.
We are hoping that you can help in a few ways:
- Get out the word to American expats in your area who may be from Colorado.
- Get out the word to anyone in your area who knows people living in Colorado.
- Get out the word to anyone in your area who may be visiting Colorado this winter (eg skiing - esp Dec/Jan) to mention Ron Paul or even just talk about the election to the various people they meet while here. Tourism is a big business in Colorado and to have foreign visitors know about and mention Ron Paul will do a lot to raise awareness for those who don't follow politics.
In turn, we hope that some of the more public organizational/grassroots info that we post on our site will be helpful to you as you think about how to affect politics in your country.
Thursday, 25 October 2007
USA Daily welcomes Ron Paul supporters and supporters of all of the candidates from either party into our newly launched USA Daily Forum that has just been launched in beta.
The controversy around the banning of Ron Paul supporters on Redstate, the conservative blog, seems to be indicative of a growing mentality regarding political expression.The limited time given to certain media non-preferred candidates running in either party, including Ron Paul, during the debates in this election, is a perfect example of an elitist mindset from members of the media. In the case of Ron Paul and the Republican primary, the idea that media generated polls should determine which candidates have a legitimate shot at winning the nomination instead of the actual amount of money raised is ridiculous. Ron Paul’s campaign at the end of the third quarter had 5.4 million dollars on hand, about a million dollars less than Fred Thompson and about half of what Giuliani has for the primary. Ron Paul’s campaign has pointed out that McCain’s campaign is actually in debt and that Huckabee has about $700,000 in cash. If McCain and Huckabee have a shot at winning, so does Ron Paul.
Ron Paul has generated crowds of 1-2 thousand people at various rallies across the country. Paul's campaign has raised almost 1.8 million this month and is on pace to raise about 2.5 million by the end of the month in online donations alone. Clearly there is support.It should also be noted that in 1996 Pat Buchanan was polling at 1-2% a few weeks prior to the New Hampshire primary even though he ended up winning it. We believe in free and fair elections and that only the voters can decide who has a legitimate shot at winning an election. We don’t know who will win the election but to claim that certain candidates can’t win implies that it isn’t really an election. We do understand that Redstate has their reasons for banning new Ron Paul supporters and they are certainly within their rights in determining the quality of the online community that they provide.
Our new forum is in Beta but we hope that voting by members on stories and posts will act as a self governing mechanism for the most part. Of course we will expect civility and professional behavior from all members of our forum regardless of political affiliation. Our forum is located on a separate website www.usadaily.net and is designed to allow for interactivity with our readers while still maintaining the integrity of our news site www.usadaily.com.
read more digg story
"Time is running out. America is approaching the writing of its darkest chapter. Stand up for your freedom; there is still hope. There is Ron Paul. If you have not already done so please join his cause and have a loud unapologetic voice for the message of liberty and peace while you still can."
Read it here.
Vedran Vuk has a bachelor degree of Economics from Loyola University of New Orleans, and was a 2006 Summer Fellow at the Mises Institute. He is currently pursuing a doctorate of economics at George Mason University.
read more digg story
Wednesday, 24 October 2007
read more | digg story
read more digg story
Saturday, 20 October 2007
Friday, 19 October 2007
"On Monday, Rep. Ron Paul, the outsider Republican presidential candidate who has long upheld these values and who was an early voice warning of the grave danger to all of us of these abuses, introduced the AFA's legislative package into Congress. (The mainstream press has an irrational habit of disparaging outsider candidates -- as if corrupt money and machine endorsements equal seriousness of purpose -- even though the Founders hoped that the system they established would lead citizens, ideally those unembedded in the establishment, to offer their service to the nation.) It is the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 [PDF], and you should read it in its entirety: just as accounts of the recent abuses send chills down your spine, this beautifully argued document feels historic and has the ring of great power to correct great injustice.
What does it do? According to an alert put out by the American Freedom campaign, it would accomplish the following:
"The American Freedom Agenda Act would bar the use of evidence obtained through torture; require that federal intelligence gathering is conducted in accordance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA); create a mechanism for challenging presidential signing statements; repeal the Military Commissions Act, which, among other things, denies habeas corpus to certain detainees; prohibit kidnapping, detentions, and torture abroad; protect journalists who publish information received from the executive branch; and ensure that secret evidence is not used to designate individuals or organizations with a presence in the U.S. as foreign terrorists."
Ron Paul was the first of all the presidential candidates, red or blue, to step up in this way -- and all credit is due to him for getting there first. May the others of both parties race to follow his lead. These days, as we have seen from how reluctant some candidates have been -- even on the Democratic sign -- even to sign a mere pledge to uphold the Constitution, it takes some courage to stand fast against the assaults of this administration -- and their manipulations of the terms "patriotism" and "terror threat" -- and insist with legislation on the Founders' vision and on restoring democracy.
A groundswell of millions of Americans of all parties rising up to insist on passage of the AFA legislation means that we are awake -- we get it -- and that we assert that an alert citizenry, not a whipped-dog Congress or a violently abusive executive, decides what happens in this nation still. I am not a voter on his side of the ballot -- but I will move heaven and earth to support the passage of this lifesaving agenda. (Interestingly when I run into Paul's supporters -- who are deeply alert to the abuses of democracy -- and I demur by saying I am a Democrat, it is they who rightly assure me that these issues transcend party)."
Read the whole article by Naomi Wolf here:
Thursday, 18 October 2007
The other day, my old sparring partner in so many Congressional committee hearings, Alan Greenspan, was on the Fox Business Channel. After Alan promoted his new book, the reporter asked if we really needed a central bank. Greenspan looked stunned, and then said that was a good question; he actually talked about fiat money vs. a gold standard. Now, the ex-Fed chairman is not about to endorse our sound monetary policy, but you know our Revolution is working when such a question is asked in the mainstream media, and this powerful man gives such an answer.
You and I are reopening a whole host of questions that the establishment thought it had closed off forever: on war, on taxes and spending, on inflation and gold, and on the rule of law and our Constitution.
A few years ago, I asked a famous conservative columnist a question. What did he think about the prospects for a restored Robert Taft wing of the Republican party? He thought I was joking. As you know, I was not.
After all the aggressive wars, the assaults on our privacy and civil liberties, the oppressive taxation, and the crazed spending and deficits, I believe that many Republican voters are ready to return to our roots. And the big boys feel it too. It is no coincidence that the Republican National Committee invited me to a fundraising dinner involving only "top-tier candidates."
Some of the opposition claims that I am not a "real Republican," whereas I am the only one in the race. And our campaign is registering new Republican voters by the boatload. None of my opponents is doing anything approaching that.
Of course, they pooh-pooh our success. "He's just registering Democrats and Independents and people who have never voted before." Well, yes. It's called growth. We are laying the groundwork for the primaries.
All over America, our support is wide and deep and growing, and young people are joining like never before. After the Dearborn debate, I went to the University of Michigan for a rally. 2,000 students turned out, something that has happened to no other candidate this year.
The crowd cheered all our ideas, but especially our opposition to the Federal Reserve, and our support for real money of gold and silver, as the Constitution mandates, instead of prosperity-wrecking fiat money. American politics hasn't seen anything like this in many decades. It is truly revolutionary.
But time is getting short. We must do massive radio and TV advertising, open many small offices (three in just South Carolina the other day), staff them, pay all the bills, and turn out our vote with massive organizational and phone-bank efforts.
As you know, the blackout is ending; our campaign is starting to get mainstream media attention, thanks to growing donations and volunteers. And contributions are the key to more attention, and to our being able to do the actual work of victory. Good news: our recent green-eyeshade analysis of all the candidates' net finances, which got so much press attention, shows our campaign as one of only three in the top-tier.
But we must keep moving up, and the Iowa caucuses are now on January 3rd. The New Hampshire primary may be in early December!
As always, everything depends on you. Please, make the most generous donation you can https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/ as soon as you can. I need your help so badly.
The other day, an 8-year-old boy handed me a small white envelope. It contained the $4.00 he had saved from his allowance, as a donation to our campaign. I can't tell you how seriously I take my responsibility to work hard, and spend frugally and effectively, to be worthy of his support, and yours.
Please help me keep working, even harder and more effectively, for all we believe in. Without you, I'd have to pack it in. Donate now https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/ . We have more than an election to win. We have a country to save.
Tuesday, 16 October 2007
CNBC learns not to 'mess with' Ron Paul, followers
David Edwards and Muriel KanePublished: Tuesday October 16, 2007
Ron Paul Tzu
By Joshua Snyder
Dr. Ron Paul of Texas is our American sage. He merits the honorific tzu, meaning "master," given to the great thinkers of Chinese antiquity: K'ung Fu Tzu (Confucius), Meng Tzu (Mencius), Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu, Sun Tzu and others. Ron Paul Tzu is both a Confucian gentleman and a Taoist sage.
Dr. Paul's advocacy of constitutional principles and the thought of the founders would gain approval from Confucius, who said "I transmit but do not innovate; I am truthful in what I say and devoted to antiquity (The Analects, VII, 1)." The Paul Administration will serve to "transmit" the ideas of our founders and their documents, which are our classics. There will be no officials who "innovate" upon them with creative interpretations or dismiss them as "quaint." Indeed, Dr. Paul's strict adherence to the letter of the Constitution is reminiscent of the Confucian devotion to the "Rectification of Names," i.e. the restoration of original interpretations of words and the rejection of arbitrariness. Said China's first teacher, "When words lose their meaning, people lose their liberty (ibid. XIII, 3)."
The Confucian statement of the Golden rule─"What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others (ibid. VX, 24)"─is remarkably similar to the "no harm" principle that guides Dr. Paul's libertarian philosophy. While the Confucian version may be less active than the Christian version, it is perhaps more suitable to governance, in that it allows individuals and voluntary associations more leeway and incentive to carry out mutual aid and charity work.
Confucius would applaud Dr. Paul's opposition to rule by a unitary executive with unchecked powers. Confucius rejected rule by force, going as far to say, "Barbarian tribes with their rulers are inferior to Chinese states without them (ibid. III, 5)." Instead, he proposed leadership by example, which is what the Paul Administration will offer America, at home and abroad. Confucius offered this admonition which could have been levelled at the current occupant of the Oval Office: "Sir, in carrying on your government, why should you use killing at all? Let your evinced desires be for what is good, and the people will be good (ibid. XII, 19)." Indeed, Confucius, like Dr. Paul, was an arch-enemy of tyranny: "An oppressive government is fiercer and more feared than a tiger (The Record of Rites II, 2)."
If Dr. Paul is the consummate Confucian gentleman, he is even more of a Taoist sage. Here, Lao Tzu presages Dr. Paul's social and economic platform of individual liberty:
The more prohibitions there are, the more ritual avoidances, the poorer the people will be... The more laws are promulgated, the more thieves and bandits there will be... So long as I 'do nothing' the people will of themselves be transformed. So long as I love quietude, the people will of themselves go straight. So long as I act only by inactivity the people will of themselves become prosperous. (The Classic of the Way and Virtue II, 57).
The essence of Dr. Paul's economic ideas are that "by [governmental] inactivity the people will of themselves become prosperous." When Thomas Jefferson famously reminded us that "the government is best which governs least," he was expressing a Taoist sentiment.
This "inactivity" or "do-nothingness" is the Taoist ideal of wu-wei, or non-action. What is the non-interventionism Dr. Paul proposes for America, and which he reminds us was our original foreign policy, if not wu-wei writ large? In warning us of "foreign entanglements" and "entangling alliances," Washington and Jefferson showed themselves to be Taoist sages as well. Like the Chinese, Dr. Paul knows that it is wise to listen to one's ancestors.
Dr. Paul is a man of peace, but his thoughts echo those of that greatest theorist of war, Sun Tzu, who, not a chickenhawk, warned that unnecessary wars should never be waged. Certainly, a Congressmen Sun Tzu would have voted with Dr. Paul against invading a country that neither attacked us nor had the means to do so: "Unless endangered do not engage in warfare. The ruler cannot mobilize the army out of personal anger (The Art of War XII, 11)." Dr. Paul's call to bring the troops home immediately from what has been foolishly but accurately advertised as "The Long War" would have been seconded by Sun Tzu, who observed, contra Randolph "War is the Health of the State" Bourne, "There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare (ibid. II, 4)."
Confucius, Lao Tzu, and Sun Tzu all lived and taught in pre-imperial China. In 221 B.C., Ch'in Shih-huang united the various Chinese states into an empire and set about to burn the Confucian classics and bury their scholars alive. The Legalism of Han Fei Tzu, which centered on the totalitarian power of the ruler, replaced the humanistic teachings of Confucianism and Taoism.
The situation is not unlike our own today. The only difference between our Republic's transformation to Empire and that of ancient China is that ours has been more subtle. (Ours is the "soft tyranny" spoken of by Alexis de Tocqueville.) Our Declaration of Independence and Constitution have not been burned (yet), nor have their defenders been buried alive (yet), but our founding documents and those who defend them have been ignored, scorned, circumvented, and trampled upon.
Confucianism survived the suppression and became the governing philosophy of the Han and all subsequent dynasties until 1911. Our constitutional republic, too, will survive and be restored. And there is one man calling upon our country to return to its founding principles, Ron Paul Tzu.
Mencius, Confucius' great heir, carried on and elaborated his master's theory of benevolent government, calling for a sage-king to lead, not rule, the people. Who among the current crop of Republicrat candidates, or even those of the last generation, has even an ounce of sagacity, save for Dr. Ron Paul, in whom it abounds. Ron Paul Tzu, the Confucian gentleman and Taoist sage, stands alone offering "Hope for America" and the restoration of our Republic.
An American Catholic son-in-law of Korea, Joshua Snyder lives with his wife and two children in Pohang, where he serves as an assistant visting professor of English at a science and technology university. He 'blogs at The Western Confucian.
Saturday, 13 October 2007
Here is an answer from LewRockwell.com to the first letter:
CNBC’s Pulled Paul Poll
by Bob Murphy
My Open Letter To Ron Paul Supporters
Posted By:John Harwood
Topics:Presidential Politics (2008) Print Media Politics & Government White House
I have been reading e-mailed complaints from dozens and dozens of you about CNBC.com's decision to take down our online poll gauging results of the CNBC-MSNBC-Wall Street Journal presidential debate.
I agree with the complaints. I do not believe our poll was "hacked." Nor do I agree with my colleagues' decision to take it down, though I know they were acting in good faith.
My reasoning is simple: Political dialogue on the Internet, like democracy itself, ought to be open and participatory. If you sponsor an online poll as we did, you accept the results unless you have very good reason to believe something corrupt has occurred--just as democracies accept results on Election Day at the ballot box without compelling evidence of corruption. I have no reason to believe anything corrupt occurred with respect to our poll.
To the contrary, I believe the results we measured showing an impressive 75% naming Paul reflect the organization and motivation of Paul's adherents. This is precisely what unscientific surveys of this kind are created to measure. Another indication: the impressive $5-million raised by Paul's campaign in the third quarter of the year.
To be clear: I believe that Ron Paul's chances of winning the presidency are no greater than my own, which is to say zero. When he ran as the Libertarian Party candidate for president in 1988, he drew fewer than a half-million votes. In last week's Wall Street Journal-NBC News Poll of Republican primary voters--which IS a scientific poll with a four percentage point margin for error--Paul drew two percent.
He lacks the support needed to win the GOP nomination, and would even if the media covered him as heavily as we cover Rudy Giuliani. Why? Because Paul's views--respectable, well-articulated and sincerely held as they are--are plainly out of step with the mainstream sentiment of the party he is running in.
The difference we are discussing--breadth of views vs intensity of views--is a staple of political discussion and always has been in democracies. Highly motivated minorities can and do exert influence out of proportion to their numbers in legislative debates and even in some elections. They most certainly can dominate unscientific online polls. And when they do, we should neither be surprised nor censor the results.
Friday, 12 October 2007
Editor's Note:Dear folks,
You guys are good. Real good. You are truly a force on World Wide Web and I tip my hat to you.
That's based on my first hand experience of your work regarding our CNBC Republican candidate debate. After the debate, we put up a poll on our Web site asking who readers thought won the debate. You guys flooded it.
Now these Internet polls are admittedly unscientific and subject to hacking. In the end, they are really just a way to engage the reader and take a quick temperature reading of your audience. Nothing more and nothing less. The cyber equivalent of asking the room for a show of hands on a certain question.
So there was our after-debate poll. The numbers grew ... 7,000-plus votes after a couple of hours ... and Ron Paul was at 75%.
Now Paul is a fine gentleman with some substantial backing and, by the way, was a dynamic presence throughout the debate , but I haven't seen him pull those kind of numbers in any "legit" poll. Our poll was either hacked or the target of a campaign. So we took the poll down.
The next day, our email basket was flooded with Ron Paul support messages. And the computer logs showed the poll had been hit with traffic from Ron Paul chat sites. I learned other Internet polls that night had been hit in similar fashion. Congratulations. You folks are obviously well-organized and feel strongly about your candidate and I can't help but admire that.
But you also ruined the purpose of the poll. It was no longer an honest "show of hands" -- it suddenly was a platform for beating the Ron Paul drum. That certainly wasn't our intention and certainly doesn't serve our readers ... at least those who aren't already in the Ron Paul camp.
Some of you Ron Paul fans take issue with my decision to take the poll down. Fine. When a well-organized and committed "few" can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of "the many," I get a little worried. I'd take it down again.
Sincerely, Allen Wastler
Thursday, 11 October 2007
And you can find this great blog-article I was asked to post:
"El Don Quijote del Congreso americano, el Gandalf de las presidenciales de 2008, el Ghandi del movimiento anti-guerra en USA, el Jefferson del siglo XXI, el Marco Aurelio de un Imperio global, el Braveheart de Texas: Ron Paul..."
La Filosofia de la Libertad (Spanish)
Tuesday, 9 October 2007
Friday, 5 October 2007
Grazie mille a Francesco per http://www.italians4ronpaul.blogspot.com/!
He also cooperates with André from Holland and has written this excellent article:
La Filosofia Della Liberta (Italian)