My thoughts..."Campaign for Liberty"...

Giving something a catchy, pretty name doesn't make it a good thing. (e.g. Humane Society of the United States, National Alliance, etc.)

The feeling I get when I listen to Ron Paul...

Lets build a dome sealing in the U.S. from the rest of the world.

Why stop there, if we shouldn't concern ourselves with other peoples problems, then after we seal the U.S. in then each state should have its own bubble, why should we worry about the other states, let them take care of their own problems. Then lets not forget to seal in each county. I mean, why should we help them? Lets take care of our own. Don't stop there, cant forget to seal in each town too. Why should our firefighters go help put out fires in the town adjoining ours if they can't deal with it themselves that's their own problem, let em burn. Oh wait there's one more dome to build, make sure your own house is safe, and under no circumstances should you go to the aid of your next door neighbor, that might jeopardize your own interests.

Funny....I don't hear him that way at all and I believe if you were to take a deeper look you would see that is not at all the message.

First it is not about one man.......it is about every citizen of this country.

Its about individual responsibility and the right to choose the way we live our lives. We make choices that sculpt our futures....be them bad or good, we embrace capitalism and free markets, we minimize our intervention into the interworkings of foriegn governments, we promote free trade and healthy relationships.... not separating ourselves from the rest of the world, (many people confuse non-interventionism with isolationism...2 totally different concepts), we truly believe in the rule of law and the Constitution, we don't rely on the federal government for everything and seek to reduce government at those levels, we promote national defense and support the troops, we believe in a balanced budget, we believe in and are willing to stand up for our rights, etc, etc, etc.

These are all the things that the Republican party of old supported. What is going on these days is simply tragic.

Its sad that the media gave Ron Paul a spin that would invoke the thoughts you mention above, because they are close to the exact opposite of the message.

Of course you don't hear him that way, your too busy wishing for a dream world.

99% of Americans be they Republicans, Dems, or Indies believe in most of the things you pointed out. Balanced budget, rights, etc., etc. They just believe in different ways of solving and/or addressing it.

Saying you believe in it means nothing. (as the old saying goes, "even Satan believes in Jesus) What you do about it is what counts. Ron could not have accomplished one tenth of what he was proposing.

 You can call it isolationism, seperatism, non-interventionism, or whatever 'ism' you want to, it's still wrong. I guess if I hear someone attacking my next-door neighbors family, I should practice this 'Non-interventionism' you seem to think so much of. We should just turn or heads and ignore anything that doesn't directly threaten us at that moment in time.

What is truly sad is that so many of you bought into the idea that Ron Paul was some sort of savior. He was just another politician saying what he thought people were wanting to hear. I'm not saying that he didn't believe in what he was saying (at least some of it). I'm just saying that he's not a dumb man, and new himself that he was un-electable. That is why he was able to make the claims he was making, because he knew that he would never have to make good on any of it. He just duped thousands of you into financing and driving his publicity stunt. That is the true tragedy here.

Wasn't really wanting to start a debate but now I feel compelled. I never thought of RP as a savior...... just someone who gets it.(the big picture) All you have to do is look at his voting record and his obvious sincerity and trustworthyness and you know he is not like most politicians. Just because he says he would try to move to a non-interventionist foreign policy does not mean we would stand by a watch our neighbors/allies/whoever be attacked/slaughtered/whatever. What would happen is we would first try to work it out peacefully, then if necessary "declare war" something we have not done since WWII. Ofcourse he would not be able to accomplish all of what he ran on.......what politician can? I saw him as a refreshening... not an end.  Explain to me what is wrong with allowing other countries to operate without us forcing our views down their throats. Obviously there comes a time to get involved .....non-interventionism does not stop our ability to take action when absolutely necessary. Fortunately, there are almost always other alternatives.  You think what he did was a publicity stunt......hell he got about as much publicity as the Green Party. Hell some of the most respected economists agree with him about how to fix the mess we're in and he predicted all of the current recession/depression whatever you want to call it. He called it right on the war and voted accordingly......him and a few others. No I don't spend any time living in a dream world but I do hope to continue living the American Dream............just a little spooked that might not be available to our children if we keep on treking along the way we are. By the way.........RP did not run to be elected, your right he did know he had no chance.........he ran to open peoples eyes to the truth and he accomplished more than anyone thought he would. Thats what the thread is about. You would be amazed at how many young Americans are now involved in politics and working to progress positively in the future because of him running and the message he broadcast.

Very Respectfully

Proud Naval Veteran, Cum laude Graduate and RP Supporter

If you don't want to start a debate then don't post political rhetoric. You come on a sight for hunting and post your "message of hope", that has nothing to do with anything this sight is about. Don't think he's a savior? Then don't present it that way. Every one of you Paulestines always start off the same way..."Let me share something with you"..."I'm here to share a message with you". Sound familiar? It's the same way those of us as Christians start a conversation with someone with a troubled soul. Y'all just try to play it off using the troubled nation angle. Heck, I even saw "Ron 3:16" signs along several Texas highways. Maybe you didn't view him that way but if not, I think you are in a minority group of his followers. 

Now let’s continue the neighbor analogies, since you keep revamping your non-interventionism on the fly. Let’s go back to the neighbor whose family is being attacked. So what you’re saying you would do is discuss with them (the bad people) the error of their ways, all while they are still assaulting/raping /murdering your neighbors. Then after a few hours or days of discussion if they didn't see it your way, first you would contact the UN (United Neighbors) to see what they think is the best course of action, then you would sit back and try to decide if intervention is the proper course. Great idea.

Now about forcing our views on others. Funny how the people here in Iraq seem so oppressed by us. They beg us for pictures of George Bush. By what you and the lefties say, you would think that would be to use as a dart board or something like that. No, in most households that have one, it is one of their most prized possessions. The women hang it on the wall with a wreath of dried flowers and such.  Some even kiss the picture each time they walk out of the room it’s hung in. I forgot many of you don't know these things because this is not the stuff the news shows you. When we as Americans drove by a couple of weeks ago during their latest election most everyone you drive by smiles and holds up their purple index finger to show you how grateful they are to have had a say-so and a vote in what happens to their country. So no, we didn't force our views on the people of this county, we forced our views on the tyrants who ruled the country by terror.

"Some of the most respected economists agreed with him." Just like both sides of the "Global Warming" issue have some of the most respected scientists on their side.

We both agree that he did not run to be elected. Even if inadvertently, any Indy party candidate serves one purpose. To take votes away from legitimate candidates.

Rhetoric? Nope just facts. Legitimate candidate? What the heck is that?.....one that is givin the green light by the media.

You sound like your over there in Iraq. Great and thank you for your service. I spent a little time there myself.

I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one.

Happy Days

Just have to say one more thing. You mention that this site is about  enjoying the outdoors. I'm all about the outdoors.... its what makes me who I am, which is exactly why I posted the topic. The things many of us take for granted are what allows us to do the very thing this site is about. Unfortunately those freedoms are threatened more today than anytime in US history.

Your right on the legit candidate part. That was a poor choice of wording on my part. By legitimate, I was not referring to anyone as the best man for the job.  What I mean is that, I feel, we should cast our vote for the candidate that comes closest to our personal veiw of things, that has an actual chance at winning. Cause by doing otherwise only helps the person farthest from our way of thinking to win.

Agree to disagree it is then. Have a great day Sir. And thanks for your service also.