It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Media Ignores Ron Paul March For Liberty

page: 5
39
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 12:17 AM
link   
I understand how people feel about this issue but Ron Paul is not completely helpless. With the digital age there are plenty of ways for him to force people to pay attention to him. I understand that an ignored march on Washington is hard for his supporters to take but if he mobilized people and got donors to help him post ads on TV, on YouTube (he could even make controversial YT vids for free), etc he could gain attention, especially if the ad mentions both Obama and McCain or another current hot button issue.




posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by SectionEight
 



""This is the lowest point and end of the road for Ron Paul fanatics. Protesting for not getting enough attention protesting. This just proves if you ignore something long enough and hard enough, it will go away. Bye bye RonPaulosers. Can't say I'll miss ya because I hardly ever seen ya. ""



you ought to know what a low point is...


protesting for not....well, they covered all the sluts YOU LIKE just fine!!!..


you haven't proved anything...about ron paul that is...


ya haven't hardly seen us, cuz the newz that ignored him, and actually anything of real substance,

is controlled by the corporations, the whores you love so much!..
..
..



thnaks for stopping by, it's been real...



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by winged patriot

Originally posted by aLinkToThePast

Originally posted by winged patriot
Paul is just a liberal in wolfs clothing.
Only pinky's want to end the war, and thats just what he wanted.
We ain't voting for him here, never ever!
Jon Mccane is sort of liberal to, but at least he doesn't want to give up to the terrorists!
If we give in the terrorist are going to come in by boat and Obama will shows his real color. I think the terrorists are now coming as mexicans, we make um work in the feilds and they report back to Osama on our land.Its just a theory but I seen them talking in a weird tongue that isn't spainish.What does Paul say about this???Nothing because he is the same as Obama, a big fat liberal!


Which terrorists are you referring to? In case you havent noticed the Afghanistan , and Iraq war is not a "war on terrorism". The war on Terrorism is a phoney war.... The threat of Terrorism on the United States is no higher than any other country. Its purpose is to keep you and other easily convinced citizens to continue to support The NWO's Expansion.

[edit on 16-7-2008 by aLinkToThePast]

[edit on 16-7-2008 by aLinkToThePast]


Its liberal terrrorist lovers like Ron Paul who give conservatives a band name. He is a fake... if he was a real conservative he would want us to stay there as long as it takes!A real conservative would stay there until every late one was dead if you have to! Pansy liberal zoombee!


you still haven't addressed my point or answered my question.... every late one was dead every last one you mean? Are you joking so the motto for conservatives should be, "WE will stay in Iraq until the job is done , or every last one is dead"?... i dont think anything else needs to be said about your retardedness , and uselessness.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
I understand how people feel about this issue but Ron Paul is not completely helpless. With the digital age there are plenty of ways for him to force people to pay attention to him. I understand that an ignored march on Washington is hard for his supporters to take but if he mobilized people and got donors to help him post ads on TV, on YouTube (he could even make controversial YT vids for free), etc he could gain attention, especially if the ad mentions both Obama and McCain or another current hot button issue.

Its not his job to convince the people , its the people's job to identify truth..and believe in it. The Fact that he isn't covered in the news is more of a reason to vote for him... Mccain is a member of the trilateral commission need i say more.. go ahead and vote for him see what happens , say goodbye 100% to the constitution , and you can start to prepare for a VERY RUDE AWAKENING..
Ron Paul is the ONLY choice, to restore America to the original state of democracy and full constitutional rights.
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 17-7-2008 by aLinkToThePast]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 03:23 AM
link   
reply to post by aLinkToThePast
 


and believe in it

I'd never vote for Ron Paul, I disagree with several of his policies. I don't care if he is not covered by the news, that doesn't convince me that he is better, although I find it sad he does not gain the attention he deserves.

I also find many of his stances un-constitutional actually.

[edit on 17-7-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by aLinkToThePast

Originally posted by winged patriot

Originally posted by aLinkToThePast

Originally posted by winged patriot
Paul is just a liberal in wolfs clothing.
Only pinky's want to end the war, and thats just what he wanted.
We ain't voting for him here, never ever!
Jon Mccane is sort of liberal to, but at least he doesn't want to give up to the terrorists!
If we give in the terrorist are going to come in by boat and Obama will shows his real color. I think the terrorists are now coming as mexicans, we make um work in the feilds and they report back to Osama on our land.Its just a theory but I seen them talking in a weird tongue that isn't spainish.What does Paul say about this???Nothing because he is the same as Obama, a big fat liberal!


Which terrorists are you referring to? In case you havent noticed the Afghanistan , and Iraq war is not a "war on terrorism". The war on Terrorism is a phoney war.... The threat of Terrorism on the United States is no higher than any other country. Its purpose is to keep you and other easily convinced citizens to continue to support The NWO's Expansion.

[edit on 16-7-2008 by aLinkToThePast]

[edit on 16-7-2008 by aLinkToThePast]


Its liberal terrrorist lovers like Ron Paul who give conservatives a band name. He is a fake... if he was a real conservative he would want us to stay there as long as it takes!A real conservative would stay there until every late one was dead if you have to! Pansy liberal zoombee!


you still haven't addressed my point or answered my question.... every late one was dead every last one you mean? Are you joking so the motto for conservatives should be, "WE will stay in Iraq until the job is done , or every last one is dead"?... i dont think anything else needs to be said about your retardedness , and uselessness.


Who are you calling retard? I ain't stupid just call I speak the truth. Ron Paul is a liberal who pretends to be conservative. Liberals love terrorist and all the terrorist need to be dead before we stop!



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 



" I also find many of his stances un-constitutional actually. "

oh really!

what would those be?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by toasted
 


Such as his pro-life stance.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 



The right to give birth does not include the right to murder.

there should be only two normal choices, keep it, or give it away.

murdering inconvenient babies is just plain wrong, and you should know that.

I'm glad ron paul has the guts to stand up like a man and say the right thing, instead of the "popular" thing.

even the girl "roe" from roe v wade recanted her stance on "choice". she was the pioneer

for the coming wave of profitable, ritual, mass murder of innocent babies.


And I don't see how this in un-constitutional! we have the right for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

I don't recall murdering innocent babies being in there.



Is that the only thing of his you objected to?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by toasted
 


The right to give birth does not include the right to murder.

Being pro-choice does not mean being anti-life. I mainly support pro-choice stances because it is better than women killing themselves while going to butchers or using coat hangers to terminate a pregnancy instead of seeing a qualified doctor. Women have had legal abortions now in this country for years, with out them they would still be having them, women want this right and laws will not change that, these laws help to not put already birthed human beings in situations where they make desperate decision when they do not wish to carry a pregnancy that may be dangerous to them, or one resulting from rape or incest. This is my personal stance on the matter, yours is completely valid as well. I’m simply telling you why I would never vote for Ron Paul, he does not support these rights I consider constitutional, you disagree, well for you, I have no problem with his supporters.

there should be only two normal choices, keep it, or give it away.

Life is not black and white; there are several reasons why I have to see this issue in grey. We disagree, fair enough.

And I don't see how this in un-constitutional!

Okay.

I don't recall murdering innocent babies being in there.

When a fetus below the three month marker is considered a baby and can survive out side of the womb then your statement would be correct, it currently isn’t. I do not support partial-birth abortion, only abortions done before the third trimester.

Is that the only thing of his you objected to?

No, but this is turning into a debate I do not wish to have. I do not dislike Ron Paul, I only dislike his policies and disagree with them, this is why I will never vote for him, and neither will many other people, not because he is poorly portrayed by the media, which is an utter cop-out.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by toasted
 


The right to give birth does not include the right to murder.

Being pro-choice does not mean being anti-life. I mainly support pro-choice stances because it is better than women killing themselves while going to butchers or using coat hangers to terminate a pregnancy instead of seeing a qualified doctor. Women have had legal abortions now in this country for years, with out them they would still be having them, women want this right and laws will not change that, these laws help to not put already birthed human beings in situations where they make desperate decision when they do not wish to carry a pregnancy that may be dangerous to them, or one resulting from rape or incest. This is my personal stance on the matter, yours is completely valid as well. I’m simply telling you why I would never vote for Ron Paul, he does not support these rights I consider constitutional, you disagree, well for you, I have no problem with his supporters.

there should be only two normal choices, keep it, or give it away.

Life is not black and white; there are several reasons why I have to see this issue in grey. We disagree, fair enough.

And I don't see how this in un-constitutional!

Okay.

I don't recall murdering innocent babies being in there.

When a fetus below the three month marker is considered a baby and can survive out side of the womb then your statement would be correct, it currently isn’t. I do not support partial-birth abortion, only abortions done before the third trimester.

Is that the only thing of his you objected to?

No, but this is turning into a debate I do not wish to have. I do not dislike Ron Paul, I only dislike his policies and disagree with them, this is why I will never vote for him, and neither will many other people, not because he is poorly portrayed by the media, which is an utter cop-out.

Before the 3 month mark? So your saying a human isn't considered a real human when it is in the beginning stages of development, therefore the mother has the choice to end life? That is a ridiculous statement, abortion violates the law of nature. If one was raped , then the case should be presented before an evaluator of some sort, , then exceptions could be made. This Bull# of women being promiscuous, sleeping around, or "accidentaly" getting pregnant, " oh my gosh the condom broke" , If you are not prepared to have a baby then proper and extra percautions should be taken. You should not have the right to choose at all. Lets not forget the PURPOSE OF SEX IS PRO CREATION. Just because humans have made into a something else doesnt give you the right to defy nature, taking life at your own will. If women are going to unprofessionals , and doing it themselves they should be fully prosecuted... Nowadays , almost everything centers around sex, abuse it , and you should pay the price not other innocent living humans..

[edit on 17-7-2008 by aLinkToThePast]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by aLinkToThePast
 


So your saying a human isn't considered a real human when it is in the beginning stages of development

Scientifically speaking a fetus of that size and growth can not survive out side of the womb. They are only partially alive, they are of parasite status and parasites do not have human rights.

then exceptions could be made.

And if the exception is not made women may seek undesirable methods that will hurt an already birthed person.


You should not have the right to choose at all.

This is your opinion and I’ll respect that. I do not wish to debate about abortion, it is off topic from this thread. I already stated why I dislike Paul’s positions, if you agree with him then good, you have every right to vote for him. However many will not ever vote for him simply because they disagree with his assessment of human rights.

As for the rest of your post- I have nothing left to say. I will reply to anything regarding Paul, I am not interested in an off topic abortion debate.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 09:43 PM
link   
10000?Thats nothing!15k marched in support of weed here in Canada recently.That beats out support for Ron paul.... alone!Also no arrests were made,(for what?Stealing chips from the gas station?LOL!)and it was a peaceful protest.Fifteen thousand in Canada is statement considering we have about 30 million population.With a population of over 300 million, 10k is ,well no where near enough.
If it wasnt for the conspiracy theorists i would have given the old guy a chance but they pretty much sunk his boat long before the debates began.When he first came on the scene i knew something was up because of the vids posted on youtube.I estimated his supporters numbers across the country at about 50k MAYBE 100k max.I see now i was generous with that estimate!Most of his vids at the time i was tracking him numbered 5 to 15k with one video getting up to 750k.Compare that to other politicians and well Ron paul just doesnt stack up.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 



Well no matter what "concepts" are currently trendy, that you agree with, I guarantee, this country never would have grown so great, if the founders, practiced ritual child murder.


It was still a dog eat dog fight over who was going to do what, and how to spell it all out, but our founders NEVER would have consented to the current affair of murdering innocents.

And currently, evil is winning over good, which is why paul gets ignored as much as he does.

I truly believe, it we actually had a level playing field of 2 sides of an issue that was allowed to be fully aired out , as opposed to the completely one sided techniques that are bombarding folks from magazines to teevee ads to the sludge coming from hollyweird to the so-called authorities, who are most always left of center on these type of issues that get shown on the newz as to what the current thinking is, then we wouldn't have HALF of the current insanity that we do now.

You and similar thinkers , are speaking with the same type of verbage that the serpent used to beguile eve with, in the garden, but the problem is, you've never been given an honest look at both sides of it, so that you could make an informed decision for yourself. instead, you've been told what to think and why.

If you want proof, just look at how dishonest politically correct language is. It's a lie to say we have free speech, but it now has to be politically correct!

I don't think you are old enough to yet appreciate this yet...why not ask grandma and grandpa [ our elders are a wealth of overlooked opinion with years of experience to back it up ] what they really think about the current trends.



I'd sure like to know what else you disagree with ron paul about, but I got a feeling this will remain unanswered...



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


If you haven't noticed, Ron Paul IS all over the internet.. I would suggest this link..

www.youtube.com...

A search for "Ron Paul" on youtube brings up 131,000 results.. People know about Ron Paul...

www.sourcewatch.org...

Unlike many political candidates, Paul receives the overwhelming majority of his campaign contributions (92.5% in 2004), from individuals.[20]


He has one of the most astonishing resumes in American history this guy..

Committees
House Committee on Financial Services

Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology -Ranking

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

House Committee on Foreign Affairs

Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight

Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere

Committee assignments in the 109th Congress (2005-2006)

House Committee on Financial Services
Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy Trade and Technology
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
House Committee on International Relations
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere
Joint Economic Committee

Coalitions and Caucuses
Congressional Fire Services Caucus
Congressional Rural Caucus

Boards and other Affiliations
Founder, Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (FREE)
Founder, National Endowment for Liberty (See FREE)
Founder, Liberty Political Action Committee FEC Committee ID #: C00234641; IRS Form 990; and LibertyPAC.net
Founder/Honorary Chairman, The Liberty Committee (Note: Ron Paul is no longer affiliated with The Liberty Committee.)
Distinguished Counselor, Ludwig von Mises Institute
Former Trustee, Foundation for Economic Education.


If you are an American that cares at all about politics, then you know who Ron Paul is....

-ChriS

[edit on 17-7-2008 by BlasteR]

[edit on 17-7-2008 by BlasteR]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


If i may ask who are you voting for, while i wait i shall prepare my laugh..



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by BlasteR
 



"" If you haven't noticed, Ron Paul IS all over the internet.. I would suggest this link.. ""


Sorry to barge in here, but his being all over the internet is not the issue.

The issue is the media is ignoring him on purpose.

Too bad they won't ignore trash stories ala paris hilton and all the hollywood sluts we can't seem to escape from....


[edit on 17-7-2008 by toasted]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by toasted
 


I'm not saying it is the issue.. If you'll notice, I was responding to the earlier post.. Particularly this part...


Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
I understand how people feel about this issue but Ron Paul is not completely helpless. With the digital age there are plenty of ways for him to force people to pay attention to him.


Everyone already knows who he is.... and people are already paying attention to him. That's the entire reason such a march on Washington was even possible..That's what I was saying in my post. He is a huge part of Washington right now.. He was simply voicing his opinion because he cares greatly about the same important issues the average american cares about. That's how I see it..

-ChriS


[edit on 17-7-2008 by BlasteR]



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by toasted
 


Don't you know this is what people want to see? American idol , dancing with the stars, big brother, other "reality" series, on variously throughout the week. The next day at work , the huge topic of discussion is what so and so was wearing , how good they danced and other garbageness. Constant overflow of bull# overloading the peoples minds , blocking out any notion of human development, and denying us any truth to anything that is "real". Try and say stuff like that to non ATS members, you are crazy man, pop culture, and modern society is what life is all about, the path to deeper and deeper artificialness....................................................lame.
good post toasted.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
...but you have to be a Superstar to be President of the United States.

Whoa, hold it right there!

George Bush = Superstar?

He's more like a Super Muppet!



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join