Posted on 09/30/2007 10:12:11 AM PDT by traviskicks
Edited on 09/30/2007 4:01:53 PM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
Manchester – Calls to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and repeal the Constitutional amendment that established the federal income tax drew loud applause yesterday for Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.
The Texas Congressman drew an eclectic mix of more than 500 supporters -- young and old, Libertarians and anti-war Democrats, independents and conservative Republicans -- who cheered his message of limited government, low taxes, free markets, bringing the troops home from Iraq, and returning to a monetary policy based on the gold standard.
Paul said the gathering at Veterans Park wasn't about him, but about his message -- which, he said, has been resonating with more and more people.
"Something very significant is happening in this country today. The paradigm is shifting away from government controlling our lives by force," he said. "People are sick and tired of what's happening and want to control (their) own lives."
He said people should be able to keep 100 percent of the fruits of their labor. Income tax is an example of the government controlling people, he said, as are the draft, prohibition on drugs, seat belt laws and other regulations.
Paul said current monetary policy amounts to a "secret sinister tax" that takes wealth from the middle class and poor, and redistributes money to Wall Street and the wealthy. The crowd broke into applause when he said the federal reserve system should be abolished.
Earlier in the day, Paul told three New Hampshire reporters he hoped to turn the enthusiasm his campaign has generated -- through the Internet, in "meet-ups" and through campaign donations -- into votes.
The physician-turned-politician said he expects to spend more and more time in New Hampshire. "The slogan on your license plate would indicate this should be fertile ground for us here," he said, alluding to the state's "Live Free or Die" motto.
Paul said he is running on the same policies President Bush advocated when he ran in 2000, which, he added, are the same ones Republicans have run on for years: a balanced budget, limited government, personal freedom and no nation building.
"Most Republicans -- the leadership in Washington -- don't believe in their own platform; that's why they are losing," Paul said.
Rather than try to spread democracy around the world, he said, politicians ought to focus on some of the shortcomings in this country.
"You don't get a fair shake unless you join the establishment," he said.
Paul, who ran for President in 1988 as the Libertarian Party's nominee, said it's more practical to run as a Republican, noting he spent half of his money in 1988 just trying to get on the ballot in all 50 states.
The door-to-door canvassing that followed the rally -- dubbed the Paul Family Walk -- included about 30 family members who led groups of campaigners in the Queen City, Concord and Nashua. Paul himself visited New England College, Dartmouth College and the Dartmouth Medical School after the rally.
Liz Viering and her husband Peter, from Stonington, Conn., said Paul's opposition to the war in Iraq is the major reason they are supporting him. "Money spent on wars of choice takes money away from other programs," she said.
Miles LaPlant, a 21-year old college student from Attleboro, Mass., said Paul is the first candidate who has captured his attention. LaPlant said he likes Paul's stances regarding the Constitution and the country's founding principles.
Jason Kantz, his wife, Angela, and their two children came up from Cambridge, Mass., for the rally. Kantz said Paul "is the only candidate that gives logical answers and means what he says."
He said Paul's stand on the war in Iraq is also an important issue for him. "We need to reduce our involvement around the world and the amount of money we are spending," Kantz said.
Long-time Libertarian Party member Dennis Corrigan of Boxford, Mass., said he supported Paul when the Congressman ran for President as the Libertarian nominee. He said he has been a Libertarian for 40 years and headed the party in Canada at one time.
Corrigan and a friend were soliticiting signatures for a Massachusetts ballot initiative outlawing the income tax. Corrigan said his friend moved to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project, adding that he plans to move to the state, as well.
Thomas Clark, Minister of the Somersworth Tri-City Convenant Church, gave the invocation for the rally. Before the rally, he said he supports Paul because of his pro-life stance. "The pro-life issue is a major issue for me," Clark said.
Paul concluded the rally by encouraging his supporters to keep the faith, saying most mass movements have been driven by only 2 or 3 percent of the population.
"You are part of that 3 percent today," he said.
A word from Jim Robinson to the moonbats:
To all antiwar moonbats, Paulistas included:
Hey, if you don't like FR and or our support the war policies leave. Go find a website that supports your unfortunate, short-sighted and misguided antiwar efforts. It's really that simple.
In case you antiwar Paulistas haven't noticed, Free Republic supports the war effort 100%. Many of our chapters protest against the antiwar moonbats either weekly, monthly or whenever the opportunity arises. The DC Chapter has been protesting against the antiwar moonbats EVERY Friday night at Walter Reed for three years.
Free Republic has co-sponsored several cross country caravans and hundreds of rallies in cities all across the country and in DC against the antiwar moonbats and in support of our Commander-in-chief, our troops, the war effort and our Gold Star and Blue Star families, many of whom are FReepers.
When you are supporting antiwar moonbats you are working against Free Republic's mission, hurting our efforts, hurting our families who have lost loved ones or have loved ones involved in the fighting, hurting our troops, damaging their morale, working against our efforts to defeat the enemy, and, in fact, giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Antiwar moonbats are the domestic enemy. Antiwar moonbats willingly give aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime. In my book, that's tantamount to treason. Ron Paul is an antiwar moonbat. You figure it out. If antiwar moonbats are the enemy and Ron Paul is an aid and comfort supplying antiwar moonbat, then Ron Paul IS the enemy!
If you Paulistas are looking for support on FR for an antiwar moonbat who is giving aid and comfort to our enemies, you're nuts! Free Republic will NEVER support antiwar moonbats!
As far as our official policy on Ron Paul is concerned, it's the same policy we have for his antiwar moonbat allies the traitors Harry Reid, Chuckie Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Jack Murtha, Cindy Sheehan, Barbara Streisand, Jane Fonda, CodePink, International Answer, et al and their flaming antiwar spam monkeys. Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!
Where the hell did you guys ever get the idea that enemy supporting antiwar moonbats would be welcome on FR?
That plain enough for you or do I need to spell it out?
I love the way the Mods change these Paul thread titles to be more in line with reality. LOL
My idea is that the military should fund itself(or at least partly). They would do this by obtaining a lease or temporary rights to natural resources in places they are deployed. Obviously there would need to be some kind of oversight. We can’t have the military deploying itself to all the resource rich places in the world just to cash in. But it seems to me when America is doing police type actions all over the place, someone else should be helping to pay for that. We could do something like this: Allow the military to seek out it’s own funding to equal the value of the fuel and ordnance consumed, but no more. And they would not be allowed to take resources from region A to compensate for expenditures in region B.
There’s a lot that would need to be worked out, but I don’t see why the military shouldn’t be finding some of it’s own funding in some way.
Eliminate the federal income tax? Term limits?
How would these corrupt hacks stay in power? How would all these hacks from both parties make a killer living off the stupid citizens that continue to elect the wealthy elites over and over. No term limits.
Most of these people have made a great living for many years consuming our tax dollars. What would they do? How would they make a living? Who would pay for their multi-million dollar homes and limos?
I think we need more taxes to help pay for their retirement pensions and their life styles. We need more government and more control.
Liz Viering and her husband Peter, from Stonington, Conn., said Paul's opposition to the war in Iraq is the major reason they are supporting him. "Money spent on wars of choice takes money away from other programs," she said.
Yep. Anti-war. So government money can be spent on other programs. Yep, a committed conservative here! BWAHAHAHAHA!
The “Useful Idiot” Party Candidate.
A true libertarian! GO ,,,, RON PAUL ,,,, GO!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, the mods. They’re nothing but prawns of Wall Street bankers.
I have no idea what the rules are here on FR anymore. No more Ron Paul pings, but can I say something nice about an elected public serpent like Ron Paul who wants to shrink Gubmint to within an inch of it’s life?
Please advise. I’m waiting for my marching orders.
A truly all-volunteer military: no conscription of funding.
Other than the security (national defence measures you cited): the market can take care of sanitation on it’s own; it doesn’t need government to fix that for us!
“why was the title of this thread altered?”
I was wondering the same thing. This is the stuff that makes me more active where I can be, locally, seeing as how the hamhanded Rudy McThomneyites regularly mod or flame Paul threads—appearing impervious to being moderated themselves.
Only citizens of the United States who have been legally registered to vote after providing photographic documentation of such citizenship to the proper authority may donate money or anything else of value to a candidate legally running for federal office but only if the candidate directly represents the citizen and the citizen can vote for the candidate.
That's basically it. If you cannot legally vote for the candidate you can't give them anything of value. No more lobbyists, no more Hillpac, no more moveon.org. No more John McCain types running around the country sticking their hands in peoples pockets for money. They would be too busy at home listening to the people they represent for a change because thats the only place they would get any money from.
Something like this will never happen, of course but we need to get back to the idea who you elect represents you.
Yep. Anti-war. So government money can be spent on other programs. Yep, a committed conservative here! BWAHAHAHAHA!
And they love to go around saying he's the "only true conservative." Where do they get this stuff?
Coulnd't help but notice that Liz and her husband Peter are from Stonington, CA. The weed going around these days must be a good deal more powerful than the stuff we had when I was in college. ;-)
Thank you,
A prole.
Agreed. I don't see eye to eye with RP on the WOT. ...to say the least. But he's spot-on about the abolition of the IRS, the U.S. pulling out of the UN, and the drastic reduction of both the size and scope of gov't. ....issues that shouldn't be controversial around these parts.
PS: I am paying good money to the Fed’rul Gubmint in taxes and all I ask is that they keep me and my family from being blown to bits by an Islamofascist.
By whatever means necesary.
Ron Paul is misguided on the WOT but he is still a genius when it comes to libertarian, limited Government DOMESTIC issues.
Can I say something nice about his libertarian domestic policy?
You’ve said something nice about his libertarian domestic policy, and you’re still here. That should answer your question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.