2012 Election | News | Ron Paul

Ron Paul Gets the Bad Lip-Reading Treatment: VIDEO

Paul

Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney have had their speaking patterns previously parsed.

Now Ron Paul gets the treatment, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Hilarious! And such a cute man he is. Go Ron!

    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 12:57:08 PM


  2. well, at least he makes more sense.

    Posted by: sleepy bear | Dec 7, 2011 1:12:50 PM


  3. Finally a Right wing candidate I can get behind. You see, I also farm Leprechauns.

    Posted by: Sargon Bighorn | Dec 7, 2011 1:16:30 PM


  4. Ron is actually the best candidate in the field. I mean all the other candidates, GOP hawks and establishment, and homophobic teabaggers hate his guts... so he has my vote.

    And of course he is the only one that actually talks about the wall street criminals with their crony capitalism and the out of control banks and the federal reserve. A lot of OWS protesters are beginning to like him as well.

    He is anti-war, anti-big corp, anti-monopoly, anti-abortion, pro-self defense and is pro-open gay service and freedom to marry. So that is GOOD in my book (and many other LGBTs as well)

    GO RON GO!!!

    Posted by: Jose S. | Dec 7, 2011 1:26:32 PM


  5. Jose S, actually Ron Paul recently said that he SUPPORTS DOMA if states legislate for it and at the same time supports same-sex marriage if states so legislate. He can't have it both ways. It's a snide way to get him off the hook with the gay haters and to curry favor with gullible gays. Under his stewardship in the White House there would be NO repeal of DOMA unless states individually legislated for it. He's a phony when it comes to equality for LGBT people. He's not once decried DOMA, classic republican in civil libertarian clothing and he's never personally said he supports marriage equality. What he has said is that states must make those decisions, similar to what George Bush during his first term. States can either support or ban it. Be carful what you wish for.

    Posted by: Robert in NYC | Dec 7, 2011 1:47:54 PM


  6. Free Bananas!

    Posted by: benjamin | Dec 7, 2011 1:53:39 PM


  7. Yes, Robert, Ron Paul supports DOMA. But do you know why? It's because it leaves marriage to the states, as opposed to giving the power to the federal government.

    The federal government (which speaks for all citizens of this country) is no where near close to allowing gay marriage nation wide. The country as a whole is not there yet, at all.

    But, many states are! Which is the advantage of DOMA. Sure, DOMA defines marriage as man and woman, but that doesn't matter. Really, it doesn't. The point of DOMA is to allow each state to choose what's best for them, and to not allow other states or the federal government to enforce their views.

    And lastly, Ron Paul's position on marriage is that the government shouldn't be involved AT ALL. Neither the federal government, nor state governments, should have the ability to prevent people from entering into marriage. Ron Paul has said that clearly and verbatim. He believes that every citizen in America deserves the same rights/protections/abilities as any other citizen, including gays and marriage.

    This whole DOMA thing is a distraction. But, rest assured, Ron Paul supports DOMA not because of how it defines marriage, but because DOMA leaves the power to the States. And, Ron Paul is the ultimate limited-federal-government/pro-state's-rights politician. And as a gay man, that is the most strategical approach to marriage equality.

    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 1:59:51 PM


  8. One problem, Jose... Ronpaul is 100% batsh*t crazy. If you can't see that, you might be as well.

    Posted by: Dan | Dec 7, 2011 2:01:18 PM


  9. Robert is right about Ron Paul, he does not support marriage equality. Jose, what in the world makes you want to support somebody who opposes your equal rights?

    Posted by: antb | Dec 7, 2011 2:02:49 PM


  10. And... Why shouldn't states have the right to choose? Why should the people of one state be able to force their views on people in other states?

    I like that CA has medical marijuana, which is one of the reasons I live in this state. But, I don't expect Mississippi to do the same, which is why I don't move there. Same goes for marriage.

    If it were left to the states, couples could choose which state to live in based on marriage equality, and they can choose which states to avoid because of inequality. That just seems to make logical sense to me.

    Expecting the federal government to issue a nation wide law allowing marriage equality is a lost cause. Even Obama isn't ready for that.

    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 2:12:40 PM


  11. Obama is NOT for equal rights. He drops bombs all over the world, killing innocent civilians. He assassinates American citizens, without any trial or proof of crimes committed. And, he does not support gay marriage (you all know that, right?). His position on DOMA is purely political pandering, and does nothing to advance marriage equality.

    Voting for Ron Paul is voting for peace, and peace is the first step to equal rights.

    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 2:19:46 PM


  12. I have personally talked with Ron Paul a few years ago and he is not opposed to gay marriage. He is okay with it as long as it is not imposed on others.

    He supports only one section of DOMA which is where the states are not obliged to recognize the gay marriages of other states. He has told me that those who want to repeal DOMA are not offering an alternative and instead want to abolish the whole law.

    Yes he has said that gay marriage is a state issue, but so has Hillary Clinton, and many Democrats. There are only very FEW democrats that actually say that gay marriage is a constitutional right, otherwise DOMA would have ALREADY been repealed when they were in power. Ron told me that NOBODY from the Left lifted ONE SINGLE finger for gay rights until the very end with DADT, which he got a lot of heat for supporting repeal after I and others talked to him about it. Before I was like most of you but after talking to Ron Paul personally I can now understand what he is trying to do.

    Both liberals and conservatives DO NOT WANT GAY MARRIAGE TO BE RESOLVED. They use the issue to get votes (on both sides) distract us from the real problems (federal reserve, imploding dollar, police state, civil liberties, pollution etc) that is why Ron has stated that the government has no business in regulating our personal lives including marriage, in fact the marriage license is a practically new invention created as eugenics tool to regulate newly free slaves. And the other fact is that most of the federal rights are not rights at all but 'programs' that will soon come to an end if we do not reign in the incoming austerity measures that the off-shore bankers want to bestow on us.

    I just think he is a very good candidate, and I know it is hard for some of you to understand being that we are told how to think and who is 'electable' by the Republicrat establishment and corporate media. All it takes is a couple of phone calls and a few trips and meetings to help cure the diseases of ignorance.

    But heck how about that Glee episode this week? Wasn't that something???? lol.

    Posted by: Jose S. | Dec 7, 2011 2:25:41 PM


  13. Oh and lastly, he does support gay couples (and straight as well) in taking out their social security and putting it somewhere else for their retirement and leaving it to their surviving partner, but nobody from both sides supported him on that, not even the fools at GOProud...

    And he does support gay people sponsoring their foreign partners for green cards as well.

    These are the federal gay issues he is willing to support. Take it for what it is.

    Posted by: Jose S. | Dec 7, 2011 2:33:02 PM


  14. Yeah, we should have left slavery up to the states too, right?

    Posted by: RyanInSacto | Dec 7, 2011 2:47:45 PM


  15. So ryaninsacto, you think you not being allowed to marry another man is the same as being a slave? To compare the two is absurd and just plain wrong. It's so offensive to the millions of people who were slaves, who's family members were slaves, and to those all around the world that are still slaves. Absolutely outrageous.

    It's sorta like the hardcore evangelicals who say allowing gay marriage will lead to bestiality marriages and polygamy.

    You both lack common sense and don't think before spewing out your asinine statements

    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 2:56:21 PM


  16. His liking of the gold standard is a bit unrealistic, and it often seems that's all he cares about, which can't be a good thing. A true centrist candidate would I think be more progressive on social issues and less cranky on fiscal matters.

    Posted by: anon | Dec 7, 2011 2:57:36 PM


  17. BrianInLA: Oh, put aware your offend-o-meter. You know the point, which is that you can't leave civil rights up the states. Either I'm a US Citizen with all the rights and responsibilities of a US Citizen or I am not. This should not be decided on a state by state basis.

    Posted by: RyanInSacto | Dec 7, 2011 3:04:25 PM


  18. Ron Paul is progressive on social issues (legalization of drugs? getting the government out of marriage? both progressive), and I for one am ecstatic that he is cranky about fiscal matters.

    It's like people don't get that debt is a real thing, and that it's incredibly unsustainable. Not to mention the value of our dollar has been tanking for decades. Do you care about that?

    Living within our means should be a basic concept we all want, and the ONLY candidate (well, politician in general really) wanting to get us back to within our means is Ron Paul.

    Down with war and unlimited spending!

    Voting for Ron Paul is voting for peace and a sound economy. Both things this country desperately needs.

    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 3:08:20 PM


  19. Note to Andy: Posting anything about Ron Paul drives new traffic to your site. For instance, the thread has pulled in the people who care about Ron Paul who only post comments about Ron Paul because all they care about is Ron Paul. It's really magical. You get people who reduce marriage equality to "being allowed to marry another man" and don't think it's any big deal to have one's government deny it. It's a highly enlightened demographic that I'm sure your advertisers will love.

    Posted by: RyanInSacto | Dec 7, 2011 3:25:00 PM


  20. @Brianinla-

    If I've got to have a Republican President, Ron Paul is the best of the bunch, but DOMA is unsupportable so long as the Federal Government recognizes marriage as a civil status.

    The increased mobility of the American people over the last century makes it ludicrous that a couple married in one jurisdiction will find their rights under state (and federal?) law attenuated because one of them leaves the state to pursue a job opportunity. This is what the Lovings had to deal with in the 1960s.

    If you want states to continue to define marriage, then cover it with the Full Faith and Credit clause so that a marriage lawfully contracted in any state shall be recognized by every state and by the United States.

    Posted by: Rich | Dec 7, 2011 3:32:06 PM


  21. All you need to know about Ron Paul's thoughts about homosexuals can be found in this unguarded moment:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7RnlPQCKBQ

    Posted by: peterparkerp | Dec 7, 2011 3:46:53 PM


  22. Rich, I agree with you! Every state should recognize marriages from other states, but not every state should be forced to grant them.

    Truthfully though, I personally don't care about marriage. I think it's an archaic tradition and a failing institution, and it baffles me that we spend billions of dollars fighting for it instead of spending that on the cure for HIV or supporting gay kids around the country who are thrown out and abandoned by their families/communities. That being said, I think every person should have all the rights/protections/abilities as anyone else, which is why I believe Ron Paul is the best choice for President.

    I just wish the gay community would start being passionate about issues other than marriage equality. Like how about peace?

    Well, I guess we do like to talk a lot about bullying and how horrible it is, so that's something different we care about. Yet, our community widely supports a president (Obama) that drops bombs all around the world, ignores constitutional and international laws, assassinates citizens without trials, kills innocent civilians in other countries through his orders, and who supports additional militarism in countries we aren't yet engaged with. And we wonder why we have bullies in our country? Kids have been growing up for a decade now watching war, death, gruesome injuries, and the complete lack of care we have about ending it. Sure, O wants to bring home some of the troops, but he also wants to send drones around all parts of the world dropping more bombs and killing more people. Are we really ok with that? Especially when we allegedly care about ending bullying.

    We are the BIGGEST bully in the world. We dictate what's allowed and what isn't in all areas of the globe, and we use sanctions, armies, and bombs to get our way. Obama is just as bad as Bush when it comes to that, but at least when Bush was doing it we cried foul.

    We as a community, with a long history of abuse, hatred, and violence, should be the loudest voice for peace! Peace is the answer to bullies. Peace is the answer to hate. If we were a country who promoted and valued peace, our children would be growing up in an entirely different environment than the war-based, violent one they are growing up in now.

    For that reason alone, I am voting for the Peace candidate. Ron Paul is for peace, Obama is NOT.


    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 4:58:43 PM


  23. Here's a question for all you who are against Ron Paul's position on DOMA and marriage equality (leaving it to the states): who are you voting for?

    Can't be Obama, right? He's not for marriage equality. And, I'd hope you'd apply the same logic to him as you apply to Ron Paul.

    OBAMA DOES NOT SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE. So, who gets your vote?

    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 5:07:14 PM


  24. Brianinla , stop with this deflection that gays shouldn't worry about their own lives and gay marriage and the thousands of very much needed rights that come along with it. Also, if you believe that marriage should be on a state by state basis, Im sure you and your leader Ron Paul will say the same should be true for straight couples? Otherwise you would both be hypocrites.

    Posted by: Mk_Ultra_Again | Dec 7, 2011 6:03:54 PM


  25. mk_ultra_again, you seem to be confused. I, like Ron Paul, believe that the government should not be involved in marriage. Gay or straight. All the rights that come from being married should be available to every individual, whether married or not, whether gay or not. Yes, there are many rights that come with marriage, but why should the government get to decide when those rights apply and to whom. Get the government out of marriage! That's my position and Ron Paul's.

    As far as leaving gay marriage to the states, that's purely a strategical position based on the current fact that government controls marriage. If government is going to dictate marriage, state governments are not only the constitutional place for that, they are also the most strategical place for those that are so adamant for marriage. Getting individual states to pass marriage equality is not only much easier than doing so on the federal level, it is really the only level at which marriage equality is going to happen at this point in time. A federal law allowing it is not even close to happening. Not only would it not be close to getting the votes on a federal level, but even if it did, there will be years of legal battles following any federal law allowing it. So, that's why I favor the states choosing what is best for them, when it comes to government controlled marriage.

    But, what I have said so clearly and plainly many times on this thread and others, as has Ron Paul may times, government should NOT be involved in marriage. It historically hasn't and there is no legal authority for it.

    In closing, and hoping to make it clear yet again, I do not believe that the government should be in control of marriage, and neither does Ron Paul. The government shouldn't be involved in it at all. However, considering that it is, as of now, in control of marriage, I believe that approaching marriage equality on the state level is a far more strategical move than fighting for it on the federal level. Not to mention it's the Constitutional position too. Granted, most people could care less about the Constitution. Hell, Obama doesn't even care about it despite his oath to uphold it.

    And just so the conversation doesn't always go back to marriage equality, how about peace? Is that something you care about too?

    If so, you gotta vote for Ron Paul. He is the ONLY candidate for peace, and therefore he is the only candidate I'd vote for.

    Obama does not support marriage equality, and he is a warmonger. Enough said.

    Posted by: brianinla | Dec 7, 2011 6:28:01 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «The Human Dolphin: VIDEO« «