Wrong Paul

You should do a little fact-checking before making derogatory statements about an honorable man: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=205004696&blogID=313179052

The "NAFTA Superhighway" IS in the works (http://www.nascocorridor.com/) and is even being funded by Congress (http://www.nascocorridor.com/pages/federal/federal.htm). Ask the folks in Texas - they're already dealing with it as our government is seizing their land to build the highway (Trans Texas Corridor).

Newsweak SUX! You should stick to celebrity gossip. It's all speculations and not facts, what you all here seem to be best at. You know what's gonna be a hot seller, after the election (but won't matter cuz our country is going down the toilet and no one will have money to buy it) are Ron Paul bumper stickers that read: DON'T BLAME ME, I VOTED FOR RON PAUL IN 2008! Obama or McCain, it won't matter which anointed candidate you have picked for the masses, this country is done!

Newsweak SUX! You should stick to celebrity gossip. It's all speculations and not facts, what you all here seem to be best at. You know what's gonna be a hot seller, after the election (but won't matter cuz our country is going down the toilet and no one will have money to buy it) are Ron Paul bumper stickers that read: DON'T BLAME ME, I VOTED FOR RON PAUL IN 2008! Obama or McCain, it won't matter which anointed candidate you have picked for the masses, this country is done!

ugh...now i remember why i didn't renew my subscription to newsweek!

woah guys... if there are any facts to his claims (says the ron paul supporter *ME*) shouldnt we be payin attention? Now the reagan one is a little bit of stretch, obviously ron paul changed his mind on reagan, and supported many of the policies he didn enact, but at the time he wsa in office and the time he decided to run for president paul could not reconcile his enormous debt against his other good policies. However years later reagan is remembered for his positives policies and this is what paul chose to associate with.

Look, your points about the Superhighway are disingenuous. There is a plan to link Mexico to Canada through a highway system. The plan is semi-secretly worked through U.S., Mexican, and Canadian officials. I have seen the documents and briefings on this subject. If the matter were so innocuous, as you suggest, then why don't U.S. officials acknowledge what Canadian and Mexican officials do? True, the plan is not exactly a conspiracy, but it is well-hidden and ignored by the U.S. media. The "silence" on this topic creates fodder for the conspiracy theorists, so the media and the U.S. government are not helping the cause. Do some research, and you'll see linkage between Giuliani and the lobbying for this effort. I'm not even against the highway, but if it's so great, then why doesn't the U.S. acknowledge it? Yes, there may be hype surrounding the project, but the real goal is to create a North American Union that is different from the Constitutional construct of the U.S. It will be operated by special interests who are not Americans, but globalists. Please, please, do research; this is not TV, and the readers are not from Mars. If you need help, please contact me.

Why should anyone wonder where "Newsweek" stands regarding Ron Paul.
You could make a child molester look good and George Washington himself look like Hitler if you choose to.
Try reading the U.S. constitution sometime and do a report on ALL the area's that our, so called Leaders, are working/going contrary to it. That should pretty well fill your next issue. But Snowball's in Hell will have a better chance than Newsweek printing the truth.

Why should anyone wonder where "Newsweek" stands regarding Ron Paul.
You could make a child molester look good and George Washington himself look like Hitler if you choose to.
Try reading the U.S. constitution sometime and do a report on ALL the area's that our, so called Leaders, are working/going contrary to it. That should pretty well fill your next issue. But Snowball's in Hell will have a better chance than Newsweek printing the truth.

Why don't you make yourself useful and write about how election fraud is real and in full swing. To the Paulanteers...please post this video EVERYWHERE!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky-YXvxYbck&feature=related

Obviously this journalist is just looking for attention as he knows Paul supporters are internet saavy and educated. Ron Paul supported Ronald Reagan's and George Bush's campaign promises of smaller governement, getting rid of the department of eduation and a humble foreign policy but like most politicians these statements were sound bytes to appese the American public, Ron Paul agreed with Ronal Reagan's campaign promises of smaller government and reduced spending but when Ronald Reagans administration increased the size of government and created an overwhelming national debt, Paul was displeased. Get your facts straight, this article is grotesque. The author an idiot and many other Americans are somehow happy or content with the status quo of the country, Ron Paul is the only one talking about change, you keep mentioning numbers, how about talking about philosophy of our founding fathers who talked about no nation building and staying out of the internal affairs of other countries, why do we need to be the policeman of the world - who mad us the Sheriff of the World? This article stinks!

I for one am glad you wrote this smear piece. You are only stoking the flames of the fire that has just begun all across America. You sir, along with the rest of your counterparts in the MSM will one day have to answer for your crimes. If I were you, that ever increasing probability would keep me awake at night...sleep tight traitor.

Thus proving the point of many critics of the mainstream media ...

Given a chance to investigate Ron Paul's positions, what do we get? We get a criticism of Ron Paul's relationship to Ronald Reagan, who did endorse Ron Paul, because Paul began to distance himself from Reagan when Reagan changed his political direction. We get negative analysis of an organization not related to the Ron Paul Campaign. We get criticism of Dr. Paul's estimate of the amount we are spending maintaining the empire based upon figures estimated by the Congressional Budget Office. Bi-partisan they may be, but they have a rather wide spread reputation for under estimating government spending. Why not use the figures of the Government Accounting Office instead? Might be some surprises there. And, the North American Union? Ron Paul is hardly the only substantive figure to question NAFTA and its offshoot issues. Why not go for something more substantive, Joe?

JOE MILLER SHAME ON YOU for being an idiot, lying to your readers about the NAFTA Superhighway.

In 2005 Bush, Fox, and Martin launched the Security and Prosperity Partnership as a precursor to the North American Union. Paul is a few billion short? I'm sure it makes a difference. Nice try, but this is the most biased editorial on the web.

Nice

P

P

You generalize specifics and misapply generalities. And just because you haven't written about something doesn't make it a secret. Also, just because you can point out a fundamental example of sound logic doesn't mean that you understand it or know how to apply it; you clearly don't .

Note correction, sorry.. Feb 08th 2008 was the CSPAN WJ episode!

The Revolution continues. IF anyone wants to verify the NAFTA and NAU go to CSPAN's Washington Journal 2-10-2008 episode. Watch Hoffa talk about it. If NAFTA were junk, I am sure that CSPAN would have challenged him. We must stop NAFTA and the NAU!!

Boy... I never met anyone who was more passionate of criticizing ron paul than this author. Cut the answering the request excuse... bogus! I'm really confused why someone from newsweek would spend this much time to criticize a guy that not even his presidential competitors are criticizing. Leave the guy alone. He's not going to be the next republican nominee, so what's the big deal? I am a democrat but I always felt sorry for Ron Paul for never being heard this year (during the debates). To have a newsweek article dedicated to bashing him further expands the unfairness of the treatment he is getting. He does have a lot of good things to say about our nation's national policy. I would understand if you criticize his policies, but all this article does is down play his facts. Come on now... let's not spend all day looking for a couple of needles in a haystack....

Boy... I never met anyone who was more passionate of criticizing ron paul than this author. Cut the answering the request excuse... bogus! I'm really confused why someone from newsweek would spend this much time to criticize a guy that not even his presidential competitors are criticizing. Leave the guy alone. He's not going to be the next republican nominee, so what's the big deal? I am a democrat but I always felt sorry for Ron Paul for never being heard this year (during the debates). To have a newsweek article dedicated to bashing him further expands the unfairness of the treatment he is getting. He does have a lot of good things to say about our nation's national policy. I would understand if you criticize his policies, but all this article does is down play his facts. Come on now... let's not spend all day looking for a couple of needles in a haystack....

You are obviously bought and paid for. Try research, something most "journalists" know nothing about these days. Hell, Lou Dobbs exposed the NAFTA Superhighway and the North American Union last year. What a pathetic attempt at trying to discredit Ron Paul.

By the way, we WILL see to it that this Revolution continues far beyond 2008. I mean, at least you do admit you [and every other mainstream media outlet] give his statements little to no attention, yet look how big our base is without that media exposure. Now, image once you do start acknowledging his ideas. Soon, you won't be able to ignore us.

Have a good day...