http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party

Video describing why today(16th) will be memorable

Not sure how many people here have heard of Ron Paul, but he is certainly an interesting candidate(anti war, pro limited government, pro freedom republican). There is another fundraising drive for him today, the last one had over 35k people donate over 4 million in 24 hours. If nothing else it's at least interesting to watch the live graphs of donations: http://paulcash.slact.net/

http://teaparty07.com/
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/

His views conflict with the mainstream republican party as well as with the fundamentalists and the neocons, and since most of the party members are that, I don't see him getting the nomination. He has enough support to run as an independent, but all that really would do is put a definite lock on the Whitehouse by the democrats.
Personally, I think he's the only person running worth voting for, but
I don't think he'll make the ballot.
I think i'll just have to write in charles manson or nolan ryan again.

By the way Brandon, don't you live in Houston also?

Quote from Racer Y :

He has enough support to run as an independent, but all that really would do is put a definite lock on the Whitehouse by the democrats.

Eh?

Quote from BrandonAGr :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party

Lest we forget that the USA is a nation founded on the principle of not having to pay taxes. How's that national debt going BTW?

Quote from thisnameistaken :

How's that national debt going BTW?

Exactly why one should support Ron Paul, he supports limited government and a sound financial system instead of just printing money and going into debt. As he has said his views are more in line with traditional republican values, so I think he has a shot.

Quote :

By the way Brandon, don't you live in Houston also?

North of houston, College Station

Quote from BrandonAGr :

Exactly why one should support Ron Paul, he supports limited government and a sound financial system instead of just printing money and going into debt. As he has said his views are more in line with traditional republican values, so I think he has a shot.

Maybe that will make a difference. I remember the last time a candidate stood with a balanced-budget platform it was Bill Bradley (democrat) and he wasn't popular! You got a Texan half-wit instead.

FYI, I do not consider Ron Paul a Republican, but a Libertarian like myself.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Lest we forget that the USA is a nation founded on the principle of not having to pay taxes. How's that national debt going BTW?

That and keep slaves so everyone can be equal and free.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

That and keep slaves so everyone can be equal and free.

Yeah, because England has ALWAYS been a slave free country, right? There was slavery in England until 1833, when the "Abolition of Slavery Act" was passed.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Lest we forget that the USA is a nation founded on the principle of not having to pay taxes.

That's the principle that the USA was founded on? I thought it was founded on freedom and democracy (although not for long depending on who gets elected in 2008).

I have no idea what you're talking about. Is it because I is English?

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Lest we forget that the USA is a nation founded on the principle of not having to pay taxes.

Um, no it wasn't. At all.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

I thought it was founded on freedom and democracy

Again, no. The USA was founded as a republic, which is distinct from a democracy on many fundamental levels. If the US were a democracy we would have no Congress.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

although not for long depending on who gets elected in 2008

What are you implying?

Quote from Lateralus :

Um, no it wasn't. At all.

I thought the whole deal was that you didn't like paying taxes to the British so you all got in a huff and dumped some tea in a harbour or something? And it's not like you're paying taxes now - not enough to keep your government's spending in check anyway.

Quote from Lateralus :

What are you implying?

That freedom can be taken away easily.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

I thought the whole deal was that you didn't like paying taxes to the British so you all got in a huff and dumped some tea in a harbour or something? And it's not like you're paying taxes now - not enough to keep your government's spending in check anyway.

You should really educate yourself on that whole situation.

It wasn't paying taxes per se, it was paying unjust taxes that we had absolutely no say over. We had no representatives to speak for us and keep the system even a little bit fair. People generally don't like being coerced into doing things. The colonists had their natural resources taken and shipped back to Britain so Britain could profit from them. Finished goods were shipped back to the colonies, sold at high prices, and then taxed at high rates on top of that. Colonization is about the exploitation of the subject country for the benefit of the ruling country, and is inherently unjust and immoral. The colonies were right to get upset and eventually revolt.

Of course, today America is the aggressor, yet most Americans don't realize it. People really don't learn from history.

And citizens paying taxes has precious little to do with the spending policies of the federal government. The current administration answers to no one but itself. It's full of criminals, is completely corrupt, and should be overthrown.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

That freedom can be taken away easily.

You said "depending on who gets elected". Who specifically do you think would take away liberty? Who if anyone do you think would not do so?

Quote from Lateralus :

You should really educate yourself on that whole situation.

I thought my summation was adequate, personally.

Quote from Lateralus :

It wasn't paying taxes per se, it was paying unjust taxes that we had absolutely no say over. We had no representatives to speak for us and keep the system even a little bit fair.

I learned that part from School House Rock.

Quote from Lateralus :

The colonists had their natural resources taken and shipped back to Britain so Britain could profit from them. Finished goods were shipped back to the colonies, sold at high prices, and then taxed at high rates on top of that. Colonization is about the exploitation of the subject country for the benefit of the ruling country, and is inherently unjust and immoral. The colonies were right to get upset and eventually revolt.

That's what imperialism is. You don't just march into random parts of the world and say "This bit looks sweet, let's leave it completely alone". To be honest it's hard to feel any pity for the poor put-upon colonists when it's the natives who are the ones actually getting the shaft.

Anyway, my point was that it's funny to think that taxation was the driving force behind Americans fighting their war of independence and two hundred years later they're still not happy about paying taxes to their own government. There's just no pleasing some people.

Why some of you are arguing for America on this board is absurd; long ago I sussed out that other forum members from everywhere but America have a blind, bordering on ignorant, hatred for the U.S., their opinions will not change, and leave it at that.

Of all the "international" forums I belong to, this is the only one with such a loathing for America.

I stopped arguing long ago.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

I thought my summation was adequate, personally.

OK, if you stretch to definition of adequate to 'overly simplified'.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

I learned that part from School House Rock.

That show kicked ass.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

That's what imperialism is. You don't just march into random parts of the world and say "This bit looks sweet, let's leave it completely alone". To be honest it's hard to feel any pity for the poor put-upon colonists when it's the natives who are the ones actually getting the shaft.

Why is it hard to pity one oppressed group because another group is being oppressed? Can't you pity both? They both deserved it. The ones who didn't deserve pity are King George and Parliament.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Anyway, my point was that it's funny to think that taxation was the driving force behind Americans fighting their war of independence and two hundred years later they're still not happy about paying taxes to their own government. There's just no pleasing some people.

It's only logical to be upset about paying taxes when that tax revenue funds war crimes, torture, murder, and nationalistic jingoism. The apprehension about current American policy has little to do with the reasons for declaring independence from Britain.

Quote from jayhawk :

long ago I sussed out that other forum members from everywhere but America have a blind, bordering on ignorant, hatred for the U.S.

I can honestly say I've never spoken to anyone outside the US who just hates the US, period. I know they're out there, but the ones I've spoken to have specific gripes that they can substantiate with facts: they hate America's deplorable foreign policy, despise the scum in our elected positions, and generally dislike the idea of a global superpower which seems to think it can do as it pleases. They generally like Americans, but dislike the American government.

Quote from jayhawk :

I stopped arguing long ago.

Then why post here at all? Just a little snipe that you won't come back to defend?

Weak troll. 2 out of 10.

Quote from Lateralus :

Then why post here at all? Just a little snipe that you won't come back to defend?

Weak troll. 2 out of 10.

And you must be an internet tough guy, if we are lowering ourselves down to broad based accusations.

What I meant was, if one person was to defend America in a thread, twenty will jump on them, and the rest will just cower. Why bother to argue until so many straws are split nothing is left but to bicker over dust?

Like I said, you can try to change some peoples minds, but long ago I just gave up. People are set in their ways.

*EDIT* thank you for also setting the last straw on this camels broken back; from now on, I am ignoring the off topic section, which I should have done long ago. If you (Lateralus) follow me around the board with the sole purpose of bothering me, I will have no other choice but to report you to the moderating staff. To put it bluntly, I am too old for this shit.

Good day!

Quote from jayhawk :

And you must be an internet tough guy, if we are lowering ourselves down to broad based accusations.

Well you said I earlier that "I'm done arguing", which implies you are done arguing. Yet you're still here. Which means you aren't done arguing. It sounded as though you were quickly stating your opinion and then packing up your toys and going home before anyone had a chance to respond.

Quote from jayhawk :

What I meant was, if one person was to defend America in a thread, twenty will jump on them, and the rest will just cower. Why bother to argue until so many straws are split nothing is left but to bicker over dust?

Until so many straws are split? Way to completely butcher two different expressions. It's splitting hairs, not straws. The other expression is "clutching at straws", which is something entirely different.

If one person 'defended America' and got called on it by several people, chances are they said something completely daft and deserved it. There isn't much defensible about the current American government.

Quote from Lateralus :

You said "depending on who gets elected". Who specifically do you think would take away liberty? Who if anyone do you think would not do so?

Who? LOL why almost everyone in both parties that's who.
Ever since the "war on drugs" campaign began in the 80's, criminals - oops politicians have been chipping away at our civil liberties and personal freedoms.

The trouble is ****s like the mall shooter, Mara 13 and Barry Bonds, gives them plenty of "justification"

Speaking of the Boston Tea Party, What if king george decided that the US colonies did need parlimentary reps? Would we be driving on the wrong side of the road? Would the Beatles come from Detroit?
Would Londoners be wanting about a Border Fence too?

LOL or worse, could you imagine a Euro style government here?

Back to Ron Paul.... If he runs as an independent, he would take potential republican votes with him - in effect nullifying any hope they had of keeping the Whitehouse. But I see that happening anyway as the republicans are alienating their supporters like what the democrats did in the late '70s
I also think that if by some chance he did get the party nomination, ti would be grudgingly done so. And I think not only would he be countered at every turn by pro big gov't democrats, but stabbed in the back by his own party. He wants to kill the pork AND the cash cow. that don't set too good with the other career criminals - oops politicians

Quote from Racer Y :

LOL or worse, could you imagine a Euro style government here?

How would you characterize a "Euro-style government"?

Quote from Racer Y :

His views conflict with the mainstream republican party as well as with the fundamentalists and the neocons, and since most of the party members are that, I don't see him getting the nomination.

Quote from Racer Y :

Back to Ron Paul.... If he runs as an independent, he would take potential republican votes with him - in effect nullifying any hope they had of keeping the Whitehouse.

These two statements conflict. First you say that because Ron Paul's views conflict with much of the modern Republican party, support from within the GOP would be minimal and insignificant. But then you say that those same people would be swung toward voting for an independent Paul campaign, which would take votes away from the GOP and cause a Democrat to win.

Either this voter bloc is significant enough to swing the election, or it isn't. Which do you think?

Quote from Racer Y :

Back to Ron Paul.... If he runs as an independent, he would take potential republican votes with him - in effect nullifying any hope they had of keeping the Whitehouse. But I see that happening anyway as the republicans are alienating their supporters like what the democrats did in the late '70s

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if the republicans win next year's election. After all, they won the last two elections without too much interference from pesky democratic processes.

Same old story really, someone who might actually make a difference and improve a country, and because he doesn't know the right people in the right places he won't be elected. I am a Libertarian too. You know in the UK we don't have the right to free protest, we are arrested if we protest without permission from the police. There are strict ex-communist countries that allow free protest. But not the UK.