Wrong Paul

Where is the factual discrepancy in Ron Paul claiming that Reagan supported him, and vice versa? From what I've read, you were unable to counter those claims, you just added additional information, that Ron Paul was later unhappy with Ronald Reagan, for failing to follow through on his small government rhetoric.

People of America WAKE UP! Our Country is being SOLD to Foreign Interests!
Our Elections ARE a FRAUD! Your VOTE IS NOT COUNTED! SEE www dot blackboxvoting dot org
WATCH HBO Documentary "The Hacking of America"!

So Newsweek is now admitting that they didn't cover Ron Paul, despite knowing that he was raising funds and attracting volunteers like a front-runner might. Yet they covered Giuliani and Thompson, who had less actual support and dropped out sooner. Good predictions, guys. Since when is someone who can finish 2nd and earn over 20% of the vote in multiple states not worthy of your coverage?

Live in Texas ,and the super highway plan is easy to view.I must give you a small start,,research the redistricting that took place here in Texas.Related to:the SPP,a boring bureaucracy,thank you have confirmed Americans biggest Complaint,paying salaries for bureaucratic offices with services that have no substance, made self-evident by your statement.Boring-Idle.

IF there is NO plans for a North American Union then WHY did Bush just say last week in his state of the union address that the next North American Summit Meeting will soon be in LA???

If there is NO plans for a North American Union then WHY is the Canadian Action Party fighting so hard against it in Canada????

Guess i'll go take off my tin foil hat now and drink a glass of Koolaid while watching Faux News. OH and I guess Lou Dobbs has a tin foil hat also since he's the ONLY MSM reporter to ever discuss such a Crazy notion on his show!
RON PAUL R3VOLUTION LONG MAY IT LIVE!

If the NAU and NAFTA super highway are not a secret, then how come the MSM never talks about it? How come most of the American people don't know about it? Do you want to live in a NAU Mr. Joe Miller?

Here are a couple of participants:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heegk07026I

Here are a few comments:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBmFrYWPoG8
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/71557/
http://www.infowars.com/articles/nwo/nafta_superhighway_coming_through.htm
http://www.naftasuperhighway.info/
http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff149.htm
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU0EA
http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/NAUArticles.html
http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/NAU/

Here's the plan:
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_final.pdf

The NAU might not be secret anymore, but it was before Paul started talking about it.

what a nice hit piece on Ron Paul. This guy is obviously nuts. It would be a disaster to restore the principle of Federalism or force our government to follow the Constitution. It's a good thing that you guys were able to dig up this waylaid and misinformed pile to dump on him. BTW - How much will my subscription be in Ameros? I guess we'll find out in a few years.

Newsweek is a terrible publication -- online or off -- and will say or do anything to sell out America. This article is shallow, poorly written, lacking a factual foundation, and petty. It's the latch-ditch effort of a publication that has become the butt of jokes. Newsweek is the "news" equivalent of People Magazine. People who know Ron Paul's message know this article is a lie. People who don't can easily research Ron Paul's message to discover it's a lie. Either way, this is great publicity for Ron Paul! So, on that note, THANK YOU!

Newsweek is a terrible publication -- online or off -- and will say or do anything to sell out America. This article is shallow, poorly written, lacking a factual foundation, and petty. It's the latch-ditch effort of a publication that has become the butt of jokes. Newsweek is the "news" equivalent of People Magazine. People who know Ron Paul's message know this article is a lie. People who don't can easily research Ron Paul's message to discover it's a lie. Either way, this is great publicity for Ron Paul! So, on that note, THANK YOU!

This writer of this article fails almost every test of journalistic professionalism (http://www.journalism.org/resources/principles). But the two principles most neglected are perhaps these:

8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional

9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience

The writer of this article is not objective in any sense of the word and focuses on fringe issues rather than the consisten message that Dr. Paul has been advocating throughout his entire candidacy for Presidency: a humble foreign policy of non-intervention, strong national security, balanced budgets, limited government, civil liberties, sound currency, low taxes and a culture of life. Instead of focusing on meaty policy issues, this article distorts a few random policy issues in an attempt to character assasinate Dr. Paul. It would seem that the underlying message of this article is to discredit serious discussion of the issues by painting him in a negative light.

Upon closer inspection, Dr. Paul is right on all of the issues this article raises. NAU and the NAFTA superhighway is not a conspiracy theory. Reagan did not fulfill his promise of balancing budgets or a return to sound currency, we ran major deficits and increased the national debt. We are engaged in expensive nation-building and we have 700+ bases in 130 countries. Bush's current budget of 3.1 trillion does not include funding for the Pentagon or for the Iraq and Afghanistan war. I think that the assertion that we are spending 1 trillion or more on American imperialism is a very conservative estimate.

Dear Newsweek: This is a new low.

Here's a real article:
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/the-mouse-that-roared-why-ron-paul-won-the-election/

Here are the numbers of US military personnel deployed outside US.
Iraq and the Gulf - Currently 211,028 troops
Germany - Currently 75,603 troops
South Korea - Currently 33,400 troops
Japan - Currently 40,045 troops
Afghanistan - Currently 17,900 troops
Italy - Currently 13,354 troops
UK - Currently 11,801 troops
Qatar - Currently 3,432
Bosnia-Herzegovina - Currently 2,931 troops
Iceland - Currently 1,754 troops
What does Newsweek think it costs us to maintain such numbers? Don't forget about the housing, maintenance, transportation, equipment, civil personnel and others that are required to keep such a force. I have not an exact number but it must be tremendous. Where does the government get the funds to support such operations? Is there nothing better to do with this money? I agree with Ron Paul, and believe that we can bring the soldiers back home and spend the money here. That will be a real boost to the economy not a $500 check. I found this nice graphical representation of the US budget - (http://torrentchannel.com/gfx/Death_and_Taxes.jpg) . Look at it and think again if we're spending too much on the military. You're just a tool and you don't convince anybody.

Can't wait for the convention where my precinct will represent Ron Paul!!!

Can't wait for the convention where my precinct will represent Ron Paul!!!!