Comments for "Ron Paul: A New Hope" Video at VideoSift.com

By joedirt

joedirt (http://www.videosift.com/member/joedirt) — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 22:20:06 -0700

*election08 (aka RP channel)

By siftbot

siftbot (http://siftbot.videosift.com) — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 22:20:06 -0700

Adding video to channels (Election08) - requested by joedirt.

By Farhad2000

Farhad2000 (http://farhad.videosift.com) — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 11:29:08 -0700

I wish they didn't add that sappy sentimental music. It didn't need it and it only cheapens it.

By BrknPhoenix

BrknPhoenix (http://www.videosift.com/member/BrknPhoenix) — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 17:15:50 -0700

Oh God, not this shit again.

By doremifa

doremifa (http://www.videosift.com/member/doremifa) — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 19:25:16 -0700

"The right guy is anti-government..."

If he is anti-government then why would I want him IN government?

By lucky760

lucky760 (http://lucky760.videosift.com) — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 20:59:40 -0700

The one thing that bothers me most about him is his vehement intention to somehow get conception legally declared the start of life, therefore outlawing abortion as murder. Extremely disturbing.

By xxovercastxx

xxovercastxx (http://www.videosift.com/member/xxovercastxx) — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 23:20:19 -0700

That bothers me too, lucky. Just remember that it's not something he can do on his own and since he believes so strongly in working within the rules, I think we're pretty safe from him ninja-ing it on us when we're not looking.

And really, big though that may be, it's small potatoes compared to the problems we're going to have with many of the other candidates.

By rougy

rougy (http://www.videosift.com/member/rougy) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 00:45:08 -0700

I'd have to second putting Paul before any of the other republicans.

I don't like some of his views, but he is outspoken against the war, where the rest of the cons are sucking up to it.

"Mr. Giuliani - do you like ice cream, and is your shoe untied?"

Giuliani: "9/11" - blah blah blah - "9/11".

By Farhad2000

Farhad2000 (http://farhad.videosift.com) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 03:42:06 -0700

Ron Paul wants the decision on abortion to be taken to the states rather then having it federally administered. To him the issue is more constitutional.

Quite frankly that issue to me is a non-issue considering the stances of many of the other candidates on both sides of the isle with regards to the war and perpetual occupation via US military forces. Which is far more important of an issue right now then abortion.

It saddened me back in 2004 that the whole election start to revolve around banning homosexuality and family values when the country was at war.

By 8422

8422 (http://www.videosift.com/member/8422) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 07:34:01 -0700

although i do not agree with ron paul everywhere i do like him. (bush is anti abortion and gun control as well) I think he is a better candidate then hillary as well (i don't trust her at all) the only person the democrats have going for them is obama and he has no chance the US is still to segregated for a black president (i lived in D.C. and Portland i think it could fly there but i also lived in savannah ga for 5 years and savannah is a liberal town for the south but the racist shit i witnessed there was shocking) just my two cents.

By doremifa

doremifa (http://www.videosift.com/member/doremifa) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 12:16:13 -0700

If Ron Paul had his way there would be no Medicare or Unicef. That tells me plenty about him. Don't get me wrong, I like his stance on the Iraq War and some of that individualistic philosophy, but his extreme stance makes him uncooperative, heartless, and possibly lazy.

By Grimm

Grimm (http://www.videosift.com/member/Grimm) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:41:22 -0700

doremifa wrote:

If Ron Paul had his way there would be no Medicare or Unicef. That tells me plenty about him.

Things aren't as black and white with Ron Paul as you make it. If you look at his voting record it is very consistent and while he may vote against some things that you support you will often see him vote against things he supports. That's because he is one of the few that takes his oath to uphold the constitution seriously.

For example people have pointed out that RP is pro life. Yet he voted...
NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion.
NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions.
NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime.
NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research.
NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes.

So if you looked at just that and made a snap judgment you would probably conclude he was pro choice. The truth is he is pro constitution (some would say the opposite of our current administration) and voted NO on those issues even though they would have supported his personal belief on abortion.

By ObsidianStorm

ObsidianStorm (http://www.videosift.com/member/ObsidianStorm) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 14:32:16 -0700

This guy is the best candidate running. You may not agree with him on everything (but then I've never seen a candidate that I agreed with on everything) but at least (I believe) you can trust him.

If you get someone who is honest, fair and plays by the rules you will always be better off than with the snake that plays under the table and behind closed doors.

Even if you don't agree with Paul, as long as he respects the constitution the people will always have their say. He can't possibly push through every agenda item he has without the consent of the people and he seems to understand that.

By quantumushroom

quantumushroom (http://www.videosift.com/member/quantumushroom) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:07:35 -0700

"Everyone" says they want a bare-bones "Constitutionalist" in office, but half the country wants everything for free (school lunch, subsidies, programs, Hillarycare) and the other half knows it's foolhardy to be isolationist.

Paul is a conservative version of Nader, or so the Dems hope.

By Grimm

Grimm (http://www.videosift.com/member/Grimm) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:25:14 -0700

There is a difference between being isolationist and being a non-interventionist which Ron Paul is. People like you and the media talking heads like to call him an isolationist to scare people away from his true message of non-intervention.

By BrknPhoenix

BrknPhoenix (http://www.videosift.com/member/BrknPhoenix) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:15:33 -0700

I would just like to point out that he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of even getting the nomination, so this is all meaningless. Have a good day!

By doremifa

doremifa (http://www.videosift.com/member/doremifa) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:00:06 -0700

I'd vote Libertarian if I were a multi-millionaire. Please don't believe the hype (... and by the way, it is Thom not Tom Yorke).

By StukaFox

StukaFox (http://www.videosift.com/member/StukaFox) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 20:10:37 -0700

Ron Paul: Because Five Year Olds Should Be Allowed To Work In Coal Mines!

By Art

Art (http://www.videosift.com/member/Art) — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 23:34:51 -0700

StukaFox, he wants to defederalize it. Right now there is no federal law against murder, each state choses what to do. He just wants to give the states the power that they are granted in the constitution. 10th amendment spells it out pretty clearly.

By qualm

qualm (http://www.videosift.com/member/qualm) — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 04:05:16 -0700

-----
Farhad: "Ron Paul wants the decision on abortion to be taken to the states rather then having it federally administered. To him the issue is more constitutional."
-----

Hasn't someone stated above that Ron Paul would like to define personhood as beginning at conception, thereby criminalizing all abortion as murder? So that means he's a right-wing libertarian who views self-autonomy as inviolable...unless you happen to be a woman.

------
Farhad: "It saddened me back in 2004 that the whole election start to revolve around banning homosexuality and family values when the country was at war."
------

Not to pick on you, Farhad, but those "other issues" are questions of human rights.

(But I do recognize that it's long been a Republican strategy to limit the defining focus around elections to questions of values at the expense of issues.)

By K0MMIE

K0MMIE (http://www.videosift.com/member/K0MMIE) — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 04:45:08 -0700

Honestly guys, I hope a lot of republicans vote for him, so they take away votes from other Republicans.

By deathcow

deathcow (http://www.videosift.com/member/deathcow) — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:22:50 -0700

our government is so obviously disfunctional that I would vote for this guy