Comments on: Ron Paul Doesn’t Care About Cyclone Victims

By: Simon Scowl

Simon Scowl — Thu, 29 May 2008 21:33:00 +0000

Bye!

By: lulu

lulu — Thu, 29 May 2008 18:03:17 +0000

Excuse me? For some reason, those of you who listen to the main stream media automatically assume Ron Paul supporters are conspiracy theorists or 911 truthers. I just wanted to let the owner of this site know that I’ve been enjoying your site for the past couple of hours (first time visitor) and I will not be coming back. This hatred toward RP never ends. So, what’s wrong with supporting the end of the Iraq war? What’s wrong with following the Constitution? Whats wrong with eliminating the income tax? What’s wrong with listening to what our founding fathers advised us of?

You’re such a dickhead. I’m going to sign off of this site now and never come back! Thanks for the few hours of entertainment!

By: shawna

shawna — Sun, 18 May 2008 22:16:07 +0000

maybe if we werent 9 trillion dollars in debt we could help. but oh wait that would add on another 13 million or however much the gov wants to give. as a country we cant step in every single time these people dont take care of their own people, so we have to????when u look at our own problems here…how come we are trying to save the world when we cant even save america. shame on you for critizing him. he is a good man and wants to get us out of this whole nonsense of united nations, cia, patriot act…come on people.

By: Patrick of Atlantis

Patrick of Atlantis — Sun, 18 May 2008 16:20:25 +0000

Unlike Myanmar; Kansas, New York and Louisiana have citizens who vote in American elections.
Isn’t it strange that countries change their names and they become the worst place on Earth.
The resolution was meaningless except for the price of it.

By: Mike Patrick

Mike Patrick — Sun, 18 May 2008 02:26:32 +0000

He’s the only candidate who has a clue financially. The pyramid scheme that comprises the current monetary policy has prices rising at an 18% annual rate, which ties the worst it got under Jimmy Carter. Neither could have happened if Nixon hadn’t gone off the gold standard.

By: Tuffgong

Tuffgong — Sat, 17 May 2008 22:32:04 +0000

I agree with you… uh…omg, like, duh. I agree with his sentiments, and a majority of his policies but no politician is 100%, not even close. I even disagree with him on issues like abortion and the separation of church and state but he’s the first candidate I would vote FOR. Of course I’m not old enough which is why I’m not too vocal.

By: Scott Harrison

Scott Harrison — Sat, 17 May 2008 15:46:45 +0000

Did anyone hear from Ron Paul on this? What is his explaination?

Talk about hypocrites! Look at yourselves!!!

By: Rachael G

Rachael G — Sat, 17 May 2008 03:51:55 +0000

Supporting a candidate does not mean that one has to endorse every decision they make.

And while the hypocrisy in this instance isn’t particularly bad, it is difficult to defend such a vote in light of his prior votes. He comes across as being crass in this instance. But since I loathe Paul anyway, I’ll just continue to laugh at him for being such a true asset to libertarianism. You keep on fighting that good fight for the gold standard and against abortion, Ron! You’re gonna knock ‘em dead in Washington when you’re elected President!

By: Rocko

Rocko — Sat, 17 May 2008 03:22:01 +0000

This isn’t really hypocrisy but I would like to know why Congress expressing condolences to Myanmar for being hit with a cyclone gets a “nay”. I tell you one thing, if he were still a viable presidential candidate, this vote would sink his campaign. It would be interesting to hear him explain away this and justify congratulating the University of Kansas.

By: omg, like, Duh.

omg, like, Duh. — Sat, 17 May 2008 02:11:23 +0000

RE: Tuffgong -

As if the fact that you agree with Ron Paul’s ideas means that he SHOULDN’T be called out on hypocrisies. That is kind of the point. No one is safe from this site…politicians not included? Yeah. Right.