TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Slams SOPA

A few days before the election circus in the US will start with the Iowa’s caucus, presidential candidate Ron Paul made a comment on the pending SOPA bill

“They want to take over the Internet,” he said.

“Can you imagine how much we’re going to be curtailed in the spreading of out information if we lose the Internet?”

Paul says that while SOPA is claimed to stop piracy, it’s mostly going to invade the privacy of citizens and restrict their freedom.

Ron Paul currently leads the majority of Iowa polls.

This post is from the News Bits section of TorrentFreak where we present stories from around the web in a concise summary format. Full TorrentFreak articles can be found here. If you have a tip please let us know. News Bits have their very own RSS feed
  • sh7dow

    He’s got my vote.

    If only he could run as a Libertarian :/

    • Anonymous

      Get over it. A Libertarian wouldn’t stand a chance nationally, sad but true. You’re best chance at some sanity is to vote him in.

      • Terrification

        He’s a creationist…

        • Dunnj2007

          That is equivalent to saying, “Obama is a Muslim.” Give me one policy that Ron Paul’s creationism affects? Moot point at best. Establishment propaganda fodder more likely.

        • Worldgate

          He is, as well as a lot of other things that – in ordinary times – would make him a ludicrous choice for President. In these times though, Ron Paul is basically chemotherapy – poisonous to America in general, but more poisonous to the cancer that has taken over Washington.

        • Anonymous

          @dunnj2007 – “Give me one policy that Ron Paul’s creationism affects?”

          Let’s see, what policies could a policy of denying solidly held fact, in favor of a position dervied solely from a ancient fictitious book hold? Especially when he was actually educated in the scientific facts, and based his business on it.

          So yeah, a little thing like that is CLEARLY not going to have any impact on any other policies, is it?

  • Lukas

    I keep hearing bad things about Ron Paul, but he is still able to do awesome stuff like this, and he seems like the man America needs. If I could vote for the Americans, I’d either vote Ron Paul or Obama. And obama seems to be slipping somewhat… Not really doing anything…

    • Booboo894

      Ron Paul is the OPPOSITE of Obama! Ron Paul would save America, while Obama is the reason we’re dying! Can’t you tell socialism from the U.S. Constitution?

      • http://id.andreparames.com/ AP²

        You should read on socialism. Obama’s policies are hardly socialist. Corporatist would be closer.

        I do agree that Ron Paul is very different from Obama, though.

        • brickhoused

          Corporatist {Fasist} would be closer. FTFY.

        • Anonymous

          Maybe he was referring to Obamacare?

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Austin-Louis/100000881457662 Austin Louis

          I am amazed by all these idiots that spout exactly what they hear from fox. Obamacare is a non issue. Fasist is not a word. And how in the hell is anything Obama has done Fascist in any way.

          AP^2 I do agree with you however. While Obama is stuck due to harsh opposition from the right in the house, Paul would likely be able to get more done do to the fact that he is not strictly republican or democrat. This is why both parties hate him and this is why he gets no media coverage.

        • FuzzyDuck

          @Austin Louis

          Indefinitely detaining people without trial IS FASCIST. (NDAA)
          Killing people overseas without trial IS FASCIST. (Drone attacks)
          Spying on people without court order IS FASCIST. (Patriot Act)
          Censoring the Internet IS FASCIST. (SOPA)
          Letting US war criminals walk free while locking up the whistle blower who made the world aware of those crimes IS FASCIST. (Bradley Maning / Wikileaks)

          OBAMA is a Fascist.

          He is the best fascist there ever was, because he can make people believe he’s not, by saying one thing, but then doing the exact opposite.

          As they say: lie to me once, shame on you, lie to me twice shame on me. I’ll not believe his lies a second time.

      • Kristian L. Jensen

        You do know that the majority of the damage dealt to the US economy was caused by the previous president, right? And that the vast majority of the remaining damage was done by the senate republicans who have routinely sabotaged any attempt to fix it?

        • Anonymous

          I crack up when I read comments like yours. People twist the facts to try to make their party look better, whether Republican or Democrat. You aren’t the only one – I’m sure I have done this before as well.

          I am no GWB defender – but Obama – wow. Look at deficit spending as a simple measure. Or deaths in Iraq. More American deaths in 3 years under Obama than all of GWB’s presidency? OMG.

          I heard someone claim “well, it will take more than 3 years to undo the damage that GWB caused” (as an explanation of Obama’s HUGE economic blunders). Using that logic, of course, Clinton can’t take credit for economic prosperity. Measure Clinton’s “success” based on GWB’s first 3 years.

          See, you can’t have it both ways. If you recognize the great abundance we had during the 90′s, during years of reducing deficit spending and minimizing government. then you can’t be an Obama defender, blaming everything on GWB.

          Bottom line, GWB was a disaster. Obama was Disaster x 4 (so far).

          And yes, Ron Paul makes the most sense of any candidate.

        • IDIOCRACY

          @ anonymous:
          I guess when I as a foreigner look at the USA, I find all (after J F. Kennedy) republican presidents so far, a disaster to the world (nature and economy wise) so STFU with comments about Obama, he made USA a very little bit less hated around the globe. And to agree with Kristian, republicans killed all his very well tought out plans into disasters by their amendements to his bills (social bill f.e.) in order to let them pass. If I would have been Obama, I would have refused to take the job with the republicans in majority in either congress or senate.
          Oh and the real ones to blame are the bankers and entertainment industy (hehe). The bankes stole 700 billion from the USA people and the entertainment industry wants what is left.
          I guess everyone in power in USA forgets Ceasars rule: give the people bread and ganes (for free) and they will be happy (and leave you in controll hehe)

        • http://www.jroller.com/shareme/ shareme

          one problem, Senate was in Dem control for one Presidential term..what did he do with that term go on vacation?

        • Geb

          @IDIOCRACY yeah your an idiot

        • FuzzyDuck

          “STFU with comments about Obama, he made USA a very little bit less hated around the globe”

          Hahahahahaha, hahahhahahahah, lol, lol, hahahahahaha.

          Maybe if he’d kept his promises he might have managed to make the US less hated. But when the US army is still out occupying other countries and “accidentally” killing innocent civilians and then trying to cover it up, you are NOT making friends.

          Have you also noted how the US administration is busy pushing it’s anti-Internet laws in countries everywhere? I can’t remember that happening even under the disastrous Bush administration – which was so busy focussing on other things that the US at least left us alone. Under Obama the “attack other countries” doctrine has expanded from the narrow militaristic attacks of the Bush years on a few countries, to an all out attack with all possible means on everybody!

          I personally hate the US more now that they are trying to undermine our Internet freedoms and other civil liberties by threatening our governments. Spain was the latest to fall.

          Please FUCK OFF USA, and STAY THE FUCK OUT OF OUR BUSINESS!!!

      • http://twitter.com/Amranu Andrew Duquette

        Do you even know what socialism is? Rofl.

        (hint: it doesn’t mean ‘create lots of social services for poor people!’)

    • Obama is Gay

      No, fuck obama from the beginning

    • Anonymous

      Probably because he’s very libertarian on EVERY issue. There are some cases in which the approach works very well – such as Internet regulation – and other cases where it doesn’t.

      He’s a bad candidate for an entirely different list of reasons than most other Republicans. The establishment GOP doesn’t really like him anyway, because his anti-intervention policy applies to the Department of Defense as well, which is a harsh clash with the rest of the Republican party.

      • Anon

        Yes but US Troops are his biggest supporters, I tend to think they know a little more on defense then I do. So with that being said the people in the military want to come home, and who am I to tell them “no you stay over there and defend the oil.” really?

        • Anonymous

          I agree completely, I want the troops to come home too.

        • Sergeant Castle

          As soldier I can tell you a few things as to why Ron Paul is so appealing us:

          1) We are confident he will bring the troops home from around the world where we arent needed.
          2) We are confident he can actually create less wars over time (through diplomacy and commerce)
          3) We are confident he will only go to war as a LAST resort, not a first one like other presidents or create wars where none need to exist
          4) He is the only candidate to have actually WORN the uniform

          This is why I know myself and my entire brigade will be voting for him.

  • http://twitter.com/CryoAnon CryoAnon

    Hes a better democrat then Obama

    • Anonymous

      How convenient. Either way, Democrats win.

      • Guest

        Democrats vs Republicans it doesn’t matter just like Coca-Cola vs Pepsi.

        THEY ARE THE SAME THING = polititians

    • Anonymous

      *than

      And I would say he’s a better American than the rest of them running.

  • Steve

    Ron is the only candidate that isn’t bought and paid for, he’s got my vote.

    • http://www.facebook.com/newton.antony Newton Antony

      true…but i still like to walk on the ground u know in texas…
      ron paul…yea weed, no war and such , take all the troops back become neutral

      …but the reason he wont be in office is because everyone knows within a week we’ll all be floating in the ocean…all blowed up …
      troll back if u need, its the fact, everyone loves em and pretends to vote for him but he has no chance because of this

      • Kevin

        You’re an idiot. He isn’t going to dismantle our military just because he wants to end the preemptive invasions. The countries we are aggressive to don’t have the means to deliver a missile across the ocean. We will still have our borders and all of our existing military which is vastly superior to ALL other nations. How does bringing all of our troops home make us LESS safe?

        • FuzzyDuck

          You are correct. And also by stopping to waste money and young lives on useless wars, defence will actually be stronger in the event that it’s really needed.

    • Anonymous

      Yes, remove the minimum wage, cut corporate taxes, remove any requirement for healthcare, reduce federal regulations on pollution. Great if you’re a company. TERRIBLE if you’re just a regular person. I think he’s the most bought of the lot.

      The Congressional Bike if you will, ridden by every special interest.

      • Anonymous

        The reason why reducing federal regulations on pollution is a good thing is because property rights can handle environmental pollution better than a regulatory body.

        The fundamental principle of property right according to libertarianism is this: do what you want on your property, as long as it doesn’t affect other people’s property.

        You can see it’s far more straightforward and tighter on pollution than a federal regulatory body.

        As for the rest of the policies you’re against, Ron Paul believes it’s not up to the federal govt. to decide those. Instead, the states do.

        If anything is being taken away from federal law under Ron Paul, it’s because he wants the states to handle those instead.

        • Anonymous

          “The reason why reducing federal regulations on pollution is a good thing is because property rights can handle environmental pollution better than a regulatory body.”

          Hahahhahahahhahah!
          That’s one OPINION. Of course, it’s not one backed by facts, or history. We used to HAVE that situation. It didn’t work. That’s why we have the EPA. BECAUSE ‘property rights’ DIDN’T WORK.

          “The fundamental principle of property right according to libertarianism is this: do what you want on your property, as long as it doesn’t affect other people’s property.”
          There’s only ONE problem with that. In order for it to work, everyone has to believe it and follow it. If one corporaton, say ‘Halliburton’, doesn’t, then it all falls down. They make massive profits through pollution, which eventually someone will have to take to court, and prove, at their own cost, that their property was directly damaged. Incidental doesn’t count. I smog the air, you can’t go outside, your home is edvalued by I’ve not damaged your PROPERTY. The value has decreased due to the enviroment. And if you want to sue me, you’d better have just won the lottery, because it’l take millions and about a decade to get it through court.

          The principle doesn’t work. It’s a nice principle in THEORY, but one that fails BADLY due to the little thing on this planet called ‘human being’.

          “As for the rest of the policies you’re against, Ron Paul believes it’s not up to the federal govt. to decide those. Instead, the states do.”

          Let me emphasize the key word there. BELIEVES. Do you know what a government based on beliefs is called? A THEOCRACY. They always turn out good. You can’t challenge beliefs, because they’re based on what one man, or a select group of men think, they’re not based on objective facts, that can be challenged and verified and modified.

          The RIAA and MPAA *BELIEVE* SOPA is good. The facts say otherwise, but you’re not going to shift their beliefs, just like you’re not going to shift RP’s BELIEF that it’s not the Federal Governments job to do certain things, despite it being stated as such in the Constitution.

          Bit of a bugger really, isn’t it?

      • Aromanowski346

        Wow you know nothing about Ron Paul. What a shock, someone on the internet talking about something they have no knowledge of.

  • Anonymous1337

    If I was actually living in Iowa, he would get my votes hands down!

  • John Space

    This from a politician who wants to be the next president of the US?

    Sounds legit.

    • Anonymous

      That’s the thing about Paul. He actually is legit.

  • Michael

    I used to ignore Ron Paul before he even uttered a word, but not any more. He’s the only one who makes any sense –the only one who’s actually for us, the people. I find him to be trustworthy (his voting record is sound), and he has the American people at the heart of all he does. He’s got my vote, and there was a time I never thought I’d say that. Give him a chance — just listen to a speech or two, you’ll see.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

      I think everyone is doing just that. There’s no difference with Obama and Romney, so Paul has been surging.

  • Pingback: Ron Paul slams SOPA: “They want to take over the Internet” | canadanewslibre

  • Mwhahaha

    OMG a politician telling people what they want to hear in an election year (almost).

    Well I never.

    For all those American folks out there, look into one British political leader to see exactly what manifestos and pre election talk are really worth. Who is he? Why, our very own Nick ‘compromise til I shit blood’ Clegg.

    This chap will be singing a new tune if he gets the nomination and suddenly all those huge piles of cash are being offered to him as bribery, excuse me, I mean campaign donations.

    I would love this to be real, for a senior politician to have at least a few morals, but I wait with cynicism to be proved right once again.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

      Paul has been saying the same thing in our US Congress for the last 30 years.

      If you want a flip flopper, look into Mitt Romney.

    • Sick

      You are a moron. He’s had these same positions forever, it’s not re-election talk. Stop running your mouth and read.

    • Anonymous

      the difference is he has been speaking about this for 30 years..There are videos all over the internet on everything he says..There’s one when he’s talking to Norml about why pot should be legalized over 20 years ago..I know it hard to believe because 99 percfent of politicians are bad. Why do think his supporters are so fanatic.Its not because of his good looks and charisma.If you dig a little you will see your wrong.Plus nobody else is even talking about this or the NDAA

    • guest

      Ron Paul’s political outlook has been more or less consistent with his voting record for the entirety of his career in Congress. The catch here is that he’s incredibly unlikely to win the Republican nomination and even less likely to win the General Election.

      • come on now.

        the only real competition for paul to win the gop nomination is mitt romney, and paul is currently leading in the polls, so its not incredibly unlikely.

      • Anonymous

        “Ron Paul’s political outlook has been more or less consistent with his voting record for the entirety of his career in Congress.”

        You’re so right. Example
        In 1998, he calls the awarding of a Congressional Gold medal to Rosa Parks, ‘unconstitutional and a waste of money’ and that ‘she woould say no’ (she’d already said YES) and voted NAY on it.
        In 2009, he didn’t say a word when a WHITE MAN (Buzz Aldren) was up for it, and voted YES

        I guess it’s only unconstitutional when it’s black women getting it. When it’s just black men getting it (like the tuskagee airmen) it’s ‘no vote’.

        And on these three, the congressional record makes NO mention of the ‘$100 bet’ he claims he’s made every time.

        Or, we know how he hates the federal gov. But he was co-sponsor of a bill forcing the US Treasury to “to mint and issue up to 350,000 $1 coins” which would be sold at $11 each, the $10 extra to be given to scouts.
        Nothing like forcing a government subsidy of a private organization. Brings a whole new meaning to ‘bob-a-job week’ too! (Side note, I used to live about 5 miles from one of the biggest Scout campsite in the US, None of the troops we’d run in to, would mention they were even quite hard up for cash.

        So yes, go by his voting record. And the official record, and realise he’s a liar, and a hypocrite. But what do you expect from someone that’s been living off the taxpayer for decades?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Duncan/535485993 Paul Duncan

      Its easy to make a point of Ron Paul just saying things to placate the masses when you don’t actually do any background research on the guy. Try thinking for yourself for a change. Warning: That takes rational thought and a great deal of knowledge of what the fuck you’re talking about.

      We need less people like you.

    • Anonymous

      Actually, Nick Clegg made that choice because he KNEW he and his party would be hated by public regardless of what decision he made after the election results came through.

      I cannot see why people like you hate him when his party not only came 3rd AGAIN in the election, but THEY ALSO LOST SEATS in the process.

      You act like the ball was in his court when due to the economic downturn, public tensions were running high. He did what he had to do for his party to SURVIVE. Clearly, you can’t see that.

  • http://plankhead.com Zacqary Adam Green

    I like civil liberties, but I also like breathable air and clean drinking water. Why can’t there be a candidate who offers both?

    • http://travismccrea.com Travis McCrea

      Then change your party affiliation to Republican and vote for Ron Paul in the primaries then it can be a win/win for you for the overall election.

    • Booboo894

      The Constitution leaves environmental issues to the states – not the federal government. So Ron Paul is right when he says it’s not federal business.

      • http://plankhead.com Zacqary Adam Green

        He certainly is. Unfortunately, we’ve had about two hundred years of the federal government doing everything, and the states are in absolutely no position to pick up the slack. For that and a laundry list of other reasons, Ron Paul’s made no indication that he actually understands the challenges involved with decentralizing power in this country, so I’m hard-pressed to trust him with leading that effort.

        • Sergeant Castle

          I am a Ron Paul supporter, but I am concerned that removing the EPA may lead to unclean water and unclean air.

          While I agree with RP that you should do this, I do not believe the States are capable of creating these standards fast enough, nor have the resources to adaquately enforce them. Hopefully, we can see a slow and seemless transition back to smaller federal government and stronger State control.

      • Anonymous

        Funny, I thought it would come under ‘and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States’

        You can’t fight anything, even a cold, if you’ve got Cholera, or are too busy hacking up a lung from asthma brought on by smog.

        But hey, you enjoy your selective reading on the Constitution, we’ll read the whole thing.

    • Anonymous

      The EPA doesn’t create breathable air and clean drinking water. Property Rights handle pollution much better than a federal agency.

      • http://plankhead.com Zacqary Adam Green

        I just nearly died laughing.

        • http://plankhead.com Zacqary Adam Green

          Good thing my fit of laughter didn’t send me to the hospital, because I can’t afford health insurance. That’s okay, though; I could just get help from one of the many charitable organizations which are equipped to handle the needs of every single low-income person in the United States. Because those exist.

        • http://carlivar.myopenid.com/ Frank Rizzo

          Just deal with it. The wars will end. Isn’t that more important? I think so.

  • Strider

    I have never voted republican ever in the past. In fact, I had never voted before because I believe no one deserved my vote.

    But, Ron Paul just came one step closer to getting my first.

    • Booboo894

      Ron Paul deserves ALL our votes, for he is the only one who wants the feds to start OBEYING the law – the U.S. Constitution. What’s your problem with him?

      • Anonymous

        Except not all the laws (he hates the civil rights act, or the voting rights act for instance) and not all the constitution (doesn’t like that pesky ‘provide for the general welfare’.
        And that whole ‘electing’ Senators, he doesn’t like that. He wants the 17th Amendment gone.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=501521972 Dean Beauchamp

          I’m pretty sure most of your spam in these comments hasn’t come from Dr. Paul’s words himself, but more likely selective quoting of the blog “journalist” world. I especially liked the one about his strategist dying of pneumonia – are you really claiming that a man that left behind $400k of debt from medical coverage was denied treatment in some way? Being in a load of debt does not equate to being turned away from treatment.

        • Anonymous

          That’s not only from Paul’s words, it’s from his own campaign websites, and public appearances. Except on the rare occaisions when they’re instead from his official ‘on the record’ speeches in Congress.

          The DIFFERENCE Dean, is you see a politician telling you what you want to hear, and you accept it blindly. Me, I then go and VERIFY what he said, and see if he has a record on that topic.

          And look at what you’re saying ‘he had run up $400k in medical bills’ – That’s maybe 35k in ACTUAL costs, and the rest is inflation. But hey, that’s ok, because thats BUSINESS. And yes, once you get to a certain debt level ,you’ll lose any care. Oh, they’ll take you in, put you in a bed, but treatments, no ,they’ll avoid that. You’re just a money pit unable EVER to repay it, so any more ‘treatment’ is just a finanical loss. It’s what happens when healthcare is run for Profit. Those damned death panels come and get you.

          Ever actually seen a detailed bill from a Hospital? $400 for an ER examination in an empty ER, taking 20 minutes, about an abscess, and a prescription for some painkillers and antibiotics. More time was spent filing in paperwork than getting medical care.
          Or how’s about $16 for a box of wetwipes ($2.60 at walmart) or $27 for a pack of 24 N pampers (about $6 I believe at the time). I think the most laughable entry was the listed cost for a percocet, $147.50. At most pharmacies it works out to around $6/pill.

          I always have a problem with guys like Paul, who say they want to cut back on government and ‘make everyone else pay their fair share’. Isn’t it funny how they have that position after they ‘get theirs’.

          At a rough guess, Paul feel’s that about 10% of what the federal government does is ‘unconstitutional’, therefore, 10% of the time he was being paid, was for something he objected to. I just added it up, His congressional salery, since he was elected in 1996, has now come to $2,340,000. Since 10% of that work (at a rough guess) is work that was, by his own claim, unconstitutional, then 10% of that money was improperly paid to him. So, when is he going to cut a check to the US Gov for $234,000 he was improperly paid?

  • http://pollutico.com stephan Tychon

    If/when you vote you’re guilty.
    Simple like that.
    BUT
    I would go and vote for Ron Paul
    .. if only I were American.
    http://Tychon.eu

    • Anonymous

      >> If/when you vote you’re guilty.
      Nonsense. A line used by the weak and lazy.

      Casting a vote for someone does NOT compel you to take the blame for their every action. Politicians are ultimately responsible for their own actions. Voters are responsible for theirs.

      Using your logic, by NOT voting, you are responsible for the elected politicians actions. Fool.

      • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/6EWDTDGGPM2NUB23WZXTLKO6DI Lorili

        Voting for the lesser evil is still voting for evil. Voting in elections which present no real choice is participating in and supporting fraud and gives legitimacy to illegal government.

  • Sick

    I am voting for him and anyone who isn’t a complete fucking idiot will be too.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sean-Mcintier/1146574107 Sean Mcintier

    You know he’s doing something right when a republican is getting the approval of a mostly liberal group of people like those who post on TorrentFreak.

    • Anonymous

      I wouldn’t say the approval. They like his position on the ‘what’, but that’s because the WHY isn’t mentioned. He hates SOPA because it’s the Federal Government doing it. It’s not one of the specifically listed powers enumerated to Congress in the Constitution, so he’s against it.

      If a STATE government did it, rather than the FEDERAL, you wouldn’t hear a peep out of him. Actually, he’s probably support it saying ‘states rights!’

  • Libertarian

    Because Ron Paul is a libertarian, don’t care if he is republican or any shit, people are tired of a heavy government acting against people, let’s go back to founding fathers, to civil liberties, to self-defense against tiranny, to Benjamin Franklin.

    Socialism doesn’t work, heavy govnment and welfare state doesn’t works, but free-market and freedom does, simple as that.

    • http://travismccrea.com Travis McCrea

      For the record Sweden and Norway have the happiest populations in the world. So I would say that socialism does work

      • Anonymous

        Well maybe if we had true socialism designed by people who really cared about everyone.But at least in this country we have socailism for the rich..Thats what the bailouts were about.Libertarianism allows socialism at the local level where therer is a better chance of having good people making policy..Also if gives you more choices. For example Florida where i live is really bad if you need state help but new york is not..Plus Ron Paul point is (although he adkits does a bad job of explaining himself) is that if we want these programs then we need to stop spending so much on wars..Plus most of teh money we owe is to the federal reserve who does nothing but create the money out of thin air. we are indebted to counterfitters

      • Elbarrito

        Sweden has a population under 10 million and Norway has a population around 5 million. Pretty much any form of government will work when your country has the same population as Los Angeles.

    • Jon7272

      the financial markets crash wasnt socialism check and mate lol

      • Anonymous

        We can all thank the Federal Reserve.

    • Jon7272

      and i bet if you lost your job and didnt have health care. with no welfare you will be singing a different tune .thank god i live in australia

      • dotPlay

        When I lost my job, and didn’t have healthcare, I moved in with family, started my own business and lived on rice and beans until I had money for a better lifestyle.

        Anyone with enough intelligence and physical capability to vote can figure out how to earn a living on their own.

        p.s. I almost did go and apply for foodstamps, but I decided I would rather skip my daily veggies for a few weeks than do something that would cost me my self respect.

        • Anonymous

          Psst – you know he wants to do away with the voting acts, right? So you can’t really vote
          Oh, and the DoEducation, so ‘being smart’ isn’t going to be easy because quality education isn’t profitable for the masses

          Oh, and minimum wages, they’re gone. (because we have to have MORE PROFITS)

          You make a good anecdotal case, but it’s one that would be thwarted by Paul’s policies. You’re not a big business, so you don’t count.

        • Duncan

          I’ve always been amazed by this position taken by so many. Its very easy to look down on others and see state provided health care as some sort of liberal parasite but if you lost your job, had an accident and so a) couldn’t work and b) ended up with a large bill for the medical costs I’m sure you would be singing a very different tune. Or perhaps if you didnt have your family in a position to put a roof over your head.

          I’ve never got my head around this with America, its seen as undignified to ask the government for foodstamps but its ok to sponge off family instead and sneer at others who are not lucky enough to be able to do that?

      • http://www.facebook.com/tony.westover Tony Westover

        Or he could depend on his family, friends, neighbors, and community like people with dignity do; instead of being some worthless, mindless, entitled cog who expects the government to steal from other people to pay for his own problems.

        • Anonymous

          Like Kent Snyder did? Oh wait, he died of Pneumonia, penniless. Probably because his employer didn’t provide any sort of health insurance, and his friends didn’t help out..
          You know, friends like Ronald Paul, or employers like… Ronald Paul.

          I mean sure it was a bit much to expect Paul to help, he is only earning $174,000/year, from a job Synder got him. What sort of obligation is that? Oh, and Ron didn’t pay him enough to allow him to get his own health insurance on the open market, as Paul champions (and remember he wants to do away with the minimum wage too)

          Certainly sounds like the kind of person I’d want making policy decisions.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.westover Tony Westover

          @ktetch – “Like Kent Snyder did? Oh wait, he died of Pneumonia, penniless. Probably because his employer didn’t provide any sort of health insurance, and his friends didn’t help out”

          I’m pretty sure it was the fucking viral pneumonia that killed him, dumbass. It’s a deadly form of pneumonia. Health insurance isn’t a magic wand, little boy. Most morons such as yourself usually don’t understand this, but you can’t buy your way out of most things.

          Good job copy-pasting a four month old story, pal. Actually, it’s a 3 and half year old story, but you guys have your heads so far up your asses it takes you a while to pick up these stories.

        • Duncan

          Yup that makes sense, if you expect the government to pay you’re worthless, however instead its apparently a lot more dignified for you to essentially steal from family neighbours etc, that dependence being a potentially very expensive burden on them.

          Its a nice safety net to have, our employers pay a bit into the countries national insurance alongside the pay they give us, very similar to what happens in the USA and everyone has that safety net. Having worked in Europe and the USA I can certainly say the care standard in my experience is equal on average and we pay a lot less and provide for everyone without getting uptight about it. If I end up out of work for a short time I know I will be cared for if I have an accident without having to put a burden on relatives and friends who have mortgages, family and other financial commitments.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.westover Tony Westover

          @Duncan – *LOL* So you basically think that children have no dignity because they depend on their parents. So what do you tell your kids, “No, I’m not gonna give you an allowance. Ask the government for money, it’s not my job to raise you!” Great job, you’d be father of the year in Greece!

          And if your parents GIVE you the money, it’s not stealing by definition. Jesus Christ, re-read your posts before clicking send.

        • Duncan

          Actually Viral Pneumonia is quite treatable, its not terminal as you’re implying, every result of the first page of a google search would confirm that for you. The magic wand of health insurance in many countries would have entitled him to vaccination against this (saving the health provider on potential treatment), especially with a pre-existing condition.

        • Duncan

          You’re deflecting, the obligations of raising a child are well defined and irrelevant here. I’m assuming you’re an adult in age at least. If you’re out of work and you have appendicitis (for example), can your parents find ~$10,000, lucky for you if they can. I was paraphrasing your statement by using “steal” but the theft is in terms of their quality of life, thats money that could go towards their retirement, holidays, a car, bills etc, but as long as your dignity is intact.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.westover Tony Westover

          @Duncan,

          a.) Viral pneumonia can be quite deadly if you actually bothered to click any of those links that you Googled because a variety of viruses can cause it — and oh yeah, pre-existing conditions which Snyder had have a great effect on survivability. But instead, you just copy-pasted what was on Gawker. And thank God for them since nobody reads that site anymore.

          b.) You’re deflecting, people are *supposed* to be dependent on their family, friends, neighbors, and community. That’s called life. You’re saying that there’s no dignity in that dependence — instead, you’re claiming it’s better to steal money from people through the government to subsidize your fuck ups without any accountability or responsibility. How fucked up are Europeans? You know, aside from being fucked up enough cede their sovereignty to an intergovernmental body that ruined its own currency in less than a decade. (BTW, HA! Suckers!)

        • Duncan

          a) I’ve never been on gawker and you are quite correct, pre-existing conditions have an effect on survivability, hence why vaccinations exist and are given out automatically in many countries (what I said before). I think you’d agree that neither of us know the details of the medical case, I only raised it as you justified the stream of insults because its “deadly”, my point was simply that its not that cut and dry.

          b) Well I’m not European although I spend a fair bit of time there so I’ll ignore the attempt at a rise, the state of the Euro has no more affect on me than on you, the Euro is an economic mess at the moment, but so is everything else, dollar, sterling etc. It doesnt matter, I guess we’ll just agree to disagree on this one. Only real difference between the systems is that where your health insurance company makes a profit for its share holders, government health insurance schemes helps out those out of work at the same time, its not very capitalist but not everything has to be and the cost of those people is infinitesimally small in the grand scheme of things.

          Its actually quite pathetic that you can’t articulate an argument without swearing at the opponent, most people grow out of that sort of thing.

        • http://www.facebook.com/tony.westover Tony Westover

          @Duncan,

          a.) *LOL* Yeah sure, you’re not European even though you refer to Europe in the first person and America in the third person. I don’t really care either way, you’re still a moron no matter where you’re from. And apparently you’re such a moron that you think is DOES matter where you from an have to make a refutation despite what all your other posts say.

          And yes, you clearly were on Gawker or a blog that linked to Gawker since you used their exact headline wording. So not only are you a liar, you’re also unoriginal.

          b.) A capitalist system of health insurance provides a better product than the government, as is the case for ALL products provided by the private sector versus their government counterparts because the private sector has to compete and it risks failure. And judging by how all the rich people in Europe come to America for health care and how Europe and the world in general has been losing its doctors to America for quite some time, I don’t think that the European system “works”. Not to mention that routine care take ridiculously long to get.

          And it’s actually quite pathetic that you can’t refute my argument so you whine about the language I use. Actually, it’s note quite pathetic, it’s fucking pathetic. Try having some substance to your argument.

  • Pingback: Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Slams SOPA | U Torrent Free Download

  • the swede

    If i was an American i would vote for him!

  • Anonymous

    lol, of course he does, until he gets your vote anyways lol. They are all the same.

    • Guest

      Yeah, I like Ron Paul but I bet it’s all bullshit because he’s just another polititian.

      I think people should vote for him just to make sure.

      • Anonymous

        the difference is he has been speaking about this for 30 years..There are videos all over the internet on everything he says..There’s one when he’s talking to Norml about why pot should be legalized over 20 years ago..I know it hard to believe because 99 percfent of politicians are bad. Why do think his supporters are so fanatic.Its not because of his good looks and charisma.If you dig a little you will see your wrong.Plus nobody else is even talking about this or the NDAA

        • Booboo894

          Yes, pot SHOULD be legalized because the federal government has NO Constitutional authority to outlaw it! The feds have usurped that power, just as they’ve usurped so many others. That’s why our freedoms are always under attack and are trashed by the feds – they constantly break the law and have no respect for our rights!

        • Anonymous

          There’s just that little bit in the Constitution that says Congress shall have the power to provide for the common welfare of the US.

          I’d say outlawing pot comes under that.

        • jason hall

          How about outlawing Big Macs?

      • Booboo894

        No, he’s NOT just another politician! He votes according to his principles, and has done so all the time he’s been in congress. He’d be the first HONEST president since Reagan.

        • Anonymous

          Reagan was honest? Wasnt he a republican?

    • Anonymous

      the difference is he has been speaking about this for 30 years..There are videos all over the internet on everything he says..There’s one when he’s talking to Norml about why pot should be legalized over 20 years ago..I know it hard to believe because 99 percfent of politicians are bad. Why do think his supporters are so fanatic.Its not because of his good looks and charisma.If you dig a little you will see your wrong.Plus nobody else is even talking about this or the NDAA

  • FUCKUSOPARIAAMPAA

    He’s doing what Obama isn’t….I.e. not getting paid by RIAA and MPAA.

  • Guest

    As much as I applaud him in this, I do not like Ron Paul. Make no mistake, he’s the best presidential candidate in a long shot, but I still do not like him. He appeals to people with a utopian mindset; he’s too ‘disconnected from reality’, or at least it seems that way to me. He wants to get rid of the Civil Rights Act. He wants to get rid of the Department of Education too, and despite what Paultards say the DoE is a good thing, although it definitely needs to be changed in more ways that one.

    • Booboo894

      Guest, you just don’t get it. The reason our nation is so sick is because the federal government has trashed the Constitution, and constantly makes laws which violate it. Same goes for many federal departments and agencies – they’re all unconstitutional – including the Dept. of Education. Ron Paul simply wants the feds to STOP breaking the law! Now, if enough people think the DOE is necessary, the proper and legal way to create it is through a Constitutional Amendment. That hasn’t been done, therefore as of now, the DOE is totally ILLEGAL! Do you understand this?

      • http://crip.es/ Jarin

        The Constitution is not the entirety of the law. Saying that some function of government is illegal because it is not in the Constitution is like saying that gravity does not exist because it is not in the Bible.

      • Anonymous

        Actually, a lot of Paul’s positions stem from an incorrect reading of the Constitution.

        I think he’s somehow smudged the start of Article 1 Clause 8, possibly when he gets himself all over-excited at the 2nd and 10th Amendments. Specifically the bit that goes “and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;”

        Here’s where it goes, so he can write it in.
        “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”

        That’s right, the Congress has the power to provide for the general welfare of the US. So in fact, Ron Paul is campaigning AGAINST the US Constitution.
        Funny that….

        • Sergeant Castle

          RP has never said Congress does not have the power to regulate the general welfare of the people.

          I beleive RP is arguing (and I agree whole-heartely with him) is that the government’s role in regulating the Internet should be virtually non-existant or extremely limited in nature, particuliarly when it stifles innovation or potentially thrawts our freedom of speech and due process that the SOPA bill does.

  • Andy

    99.9% of politicians are going to make decisions and have stances 9/10 times that people dont agree with. If Ron Paul has 1 or 2 things you don’t completely agree with, well that’s life and I will take 1 or 2 ehhhh’s, over the atrocities that have been taking place.

    • Anonymous

      Enjoy being sold to Ron’s 1%

  • David

    I have a really hard time taking anyone serious who refers to the length of human history as “6000 years.”

    • Anonymous

      He’s talking about modern recorded history.

      • Daveycms

        I wish that was the case, but he is a young earth creationist, so he is probably talking about the entirety of human existence.

        • jason hall

          Dont be stupid, HE IS A MEDICAL DOCTOR.This is taken word for word out of his book, liberty defined.

          “No one person has perfect knowledge as to man’s emergence on this earth. Yet almost everyone has a strong religious, scientific, or emotional opinion he or she considers gospel. The creationists frown on the evolutionists, and the evolutionists dismiss the creationists as kooky and unscientific. Lost in this struggle are those who look objectively at the scientific evidence for evolution without feeling any need to reject the notion of an all-powerful, all-knowing Creator. My personal view is that recognizing the validity of the evolutionary process does not support atheism nor should it diminish one’s view about God and the universe.
          This is a debate about science and religion…and should not involve politicians at all. As Thomas Jefferson said: “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or nor God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”"

      • http://crip.es/ Jarin

        I am almost completely certain he’s referring to the age of the Earth as asserted by the Bible.

  • Anon

    He doesn’t sound like he knows what he is talking about from personal understanding as far as the actual impact SOPA will have. However it does sound like he is listening to those that do. This actually gets him greater favor from me, Id take Sergey Brins word on the affects of SOPA over a congressmen any day of the week.

  • http://www.facebook.com/tony.westover Tony Westover

    SOPA is just as repugnant and oppressive as Net Neutrality, and not coincidentally they both have bullshit altruistic names that are covers for government censorship and property seizure. It is not surprise to me that Dr. Ron Paul, being the logical statesman that he is, to be against both of these terrible infringements on liberty.

    Keep government the fuck outta my internet, thank you. We’re more than capable of regulating ourselves.

  • Sick

    He does know what it will do, he is just focusing on the part you aren’t. SOPA will allow the gov to censor opposing political voices. Ron Paul’s movement, the libertarian movement, the truth movement, what you want to call it is 100% grassroots and 95% driven by the Internet.

    For those who are unaware:

    He supports Wikileaks.

    He defends Bradley Manning.

    He defends Julian Assange.

    He wants to close Guantanamo Bay and end all extradition practices.

    He wants to close the majority of military bases the USA has globally.

    He wants to end constitution violating surveillance programs (FISA).

    He wants to repeal the Patriot Act.

    He wants to stop or repeal (if it gets through) the NDAA.

    He wants to end the war on drugs on the federal level (states like CA will be allowed to make laws regarding drugs, as the 10th amendment instructs).

    He has publicly stated he would pardon all offenders in prison or those charged for non-violent drug crimes.

    He would seek to eliminate the unconstitutional “Defend of Marriage Act”, as only an Amendment can allow the Federal Gov to define marriage.

    He would end all foreign aid, including Israel’s.

    He would stop giving free weapons to Israel to use against Palestinians.

    He would talk to Iran, rather than go to war.

    He would radically overhaul or eliminate the Dept. of Homeland Security.

    He would downsize the federal government and cut $1 Trillion from unconstitutional spending.

    He would consider re-opening an investigation into the events of 9/11 as the majority of 911 victims family members have repeatedly asked for and requested.

    He would never use an executive order to legislate from the presidency.

    He supports the re-reinstatement of the Posse Comitatus Act which bars the military from policing American cities.

    He will never sign a bill into law that violates the bill of rights or constitution.

    He would pardon Bradly Manning and end the Dept of Justice’s attempt to extradite Julian Assange to the United States for treason charges.

    –

    For those who think he’s a racist, know that even the NAACP has come out defending him, more than once, on false allegations and that during the time he is accused of authoring those letters he was simultaneously giving speeches of praise for Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks.

    • Anonymous

      Of course, you’ve missed something out. He wants to cut a lot of that stuff yes, but because ‘it shouldn’t be done at the Federal Level’. Instead he thinks states should be doing it. He hates WHO is doing it, not WHAT it’s doing.

      Some other notes about Ron Paul

      * He wants to allow Halth Insurance companies to charge whatever they want and cover whoever they want, and drop people whenever they want. Your health comes a distant fifth to the profits of health insurance companies

      * He earns over $174,000/year, yet didn’t contribute at all to his former campaign manager’s healthcare costs (Ron didn’t offer health insurance as his employer) and expected charities and churches to pick up the tab for the guy. The guy died.

      * He wants to repeal the Equal Rights Act. Apparently, the declaration of independence isn’t ‘in the Constitution’s Article 1 section 8, so doesn’t count, and so all men are NOT created equal.

      * Is avowedly racist. He constantly claims his newsletters of the 80s and 90s were ‘Ghostwritten’. Well, ‘Constantly’ as in ‘since 2002′. When they were first brought up in 1996, he admitted writing them, but said they were taken out of context.

      * REALLY doesn’t like women either. He wants to control their reproduction, and overturn Roe v Wade.

      * If you’re black AND a woman, you’ve got no chance. In 1999 Rosa Parks was nominated for a Congressional Gold medal. Paul argued against it saying it was ‘not listed as a constitutional power’ (the first one was awarded to Gen. Washington in 1776, so the founding fathers were not exactly opposed to it) and a waste of $30,000 and ‘not in the spirit of Ms. Parks’. Actually she was all for it. And in fact, so was he, when it’s not a black woman, but a old white guy like Buzz Aldren (or himself)

      * Doesn’t believe in science, including established medical facts. He was a doctor, yet in his area of specialty – MEDICINE – he ignores rigorous scientific ‘fact’, with the Theory of Evolution. Instead preferring to follow a book with no factual basis and riddled with internal contradictions, written in the 3rd Century (Bible)

      * Hates the Federal Government so much, he’s been living off it extremely well for over half his life. He started out as an air force doc

      * Opposes Minimum Wage

      * opposes Student loans

      * Voted AGAINST the voting rights act (you’re black, sorry you can’t vote)

      Basically, he’s a 1%-ers wet dream.

      • jason hall

        He offered to pitch in his own money to pay for the Rosa Parks medal, no one else in congress wanted to match him to pay for it. You have no understanding of what he stands for. You have to understand the principles of free market capitalism and the dangers of government involvement of ANY ASPECT of the private sector. Name one thing government got involved in and the quality went up and the prices went down. Education? Nope costs are 4x more now then they were years and the quality has not gone up. Did you pay any attention to housing crisis? Thats what happens when government gets involved in the private sector. Healthcare? Cost have risen and the quality has not gone up since government got involved.

        GOVERNMENT KILL INNOVATION and any need for competition.

        • Anonymous

          “He offered to pitch in his own money”
          Nope, sorry, didn’t happen. Did you think to check before you made that claim? Here’s the ENTIRITY of Ron Paul’s comments on the gold medal, taken from the Congressional Report (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1999-04-20/pdf/CREC-1999-04-20-house.pdf)

          Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 573. At the same time, I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies. However, I oppose the Congressional Gold Medal
          for Rosa Parks Act because authorizing $30,000 of taxpayer money is neither constitutional nor, in the spirit of Rosa Parks who is widely recognized and admired for standing up against an overbearing government infringing on individual rights.
          Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, I must remain consistent in my defense of a limited government whose powers are explicitly delimited under the enumerated powers of the Constitution—a Constitution, which only months ago, each Member of Congress, swore to uphold.
          Perhaps we should begin a debate among us on more appropriate processes by which we spend other people’s money. Honorary medals and commemorative coins, under the current process, come from allocated other people’s money. We should look for another way.
          It is, of course, easier to be generous with other people’s money

          If you need help finding it, look for “Mr. PAUL” it’s the ONLY thing he said.

          Did he say the same thing in 09 for Buzz Aldrin’s gold medal? hmm a look at the Congressional Record for that day (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2009-07-20/pdf/CREC-2009-07-20-house.pdf) shows he said NOTHING, But, oh, the record does note he voted AYE on it. Where are these $100 offers supposed to be made? Maybe these offers were made by the guy that Ghostwrote his newsletters?

          Sorry, another of the LIES by the PaulBots.

          As for healthcare, hmm, countries WITH government-run healthcare have a BETTER system and CHEAPER. The entirely run VA system is actually the most cost-effective healthcare system in the US. It’s the profit-driven aspects that make it expensive and inefficient. Just ask Ron Paul – he didn’t mind it when they were paying him.

          Privatized education – again, costs go UP, and quality goes DOWN. The reason the quality has gone down at present is because we have government officials who are leading policy based on BELIEF, rather than FACTS (Like oh Ron Paul, and other theocratical government officials)

          Politics isn’t like religion. FACTS are important. Ron Paul’s strategy is to repeat lies over and over to have people believe it.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          Here’s a post about Ron Paul that I found:

          Foreign Policy: While some of what he is saying seems appealing his stance is of complete non-interventionist, which was very similar to the US attitude before both World Wars which brought the world so very close to destruction. He shows a distinct naivety towards Iran and Israel, stating that Iran is not a threat to anyone and should be free from all sanctions because of this when many countries support the idea that Iran is supplying terrorists with weapons and that Israel is only under threat because the US supply them with weapons which is wholly false as they have been under threat since the country was created in the 50s. He has also shown a contradiction in his ideals by voting for military intervention in Afghanistan when troops were sent there.
          Foreign Trade: He is equally naive here claiming that a withdrawal of all import and export taxes and a withdrawal from the World Trade Organisation. He claims that these only serve big businesses and not the citizens. If he withdraws from the WTO it will become much more difficult to do business with other western countries as their trade is conducted within WTO guidelines. If he withdraws all import taxes you will definitely find a huge reduction in jobs in the US. Why would the companies continue to hire US employees when their workers in China/India do it for a mere fraction of the cost and they no longer have burdensome overheads when importing from there?
          Immigrants: While it is a good thing that he wants to sure up the borders from aliens he also wants to prevent aliens from receiving any healthcare, even in an emergency situation. This shows either a clear disregard for human life or an opinion that being a US citizen somehow makes you a better human than being foreign.
          Terrorism: Only anti-terrorism legislation that he supported was allowing airline pilots to carry firearms. He opposed standardizing airport security to detect terrorists. He also claims that he would not have killed Bin Laden had he been given the same chance as Obama. His reasoning for this shows a complete naivety that would be extremely harmful in the White House. He stated that Obama should have requested that Pakistan arrest Bin Laden, ignoring the fact that the US had consistently been requesting that Pakistan aid in the capture of Bin Laden for more than a year and that he was found extremely close to the Pakistani government’s headquarters.
          Government: He wants to remove many agencies including those in charge of education, energy, commerce, health, social security, homeland security, emergency aid and the IRS. This effectively means that the US becomes 50 separate countries with a common military an currency. The main problem is that it provides less protection for minorities and more opportunities for corruption by smaller companies in individual states, provides for vastly different levels/types of education throughout the states, with California likely to be based on scientific research and Texas likely to be based on Christian teaching as an example.
          Taxes: He states that he wants to severely reduce taxes, saying he wants to get rid of income taxes altogether. The thing about taxes is that they pay for all of the benefits you get and provide a better standard of living because of them. The most taxed countries in the world (Sweden, Finland and Norway) have the highest life satisfaction level amount citizens, they have the best healthcare system in the world and they have the best education system in the world. And to put it in proportion US taxes are, on average, around 35% while their taxes are in excess of 60%. Despite paying so much more they are happier and better provided for than US citizens. It is also noteworthy that, while he claims to want to remove income tax because it is a personal tax, he is willing to implement a national sales tax instead to provide for any tax needed by the government, providing the same function as the income tax only not balanced depending on income therefore less fair to the poor and more beneficial to the rich.
          Federal Reserve: He is opposed to the Fed because he thinks that it is the cause of inflation. He believes it would be better to introduce commodity based economy, i.e. trading actual pieces of gold and silver, to prevent the ability to print money. He seems to completely ignore the fact that as a population grows the need for money is greater and so more must be made to provide for everyone.
          Minimal Market Interference: While this is a good thing sometimes interference is necessary. One of those times was when the government bailed out the banks, which Ron Paul voted against. Can you imagine what the world would have been like if every person was unable to withdraw any of their money from the banks because they had went bust? When it happened to Northern Rock here in the UK there were thousands of people lining the streets in order to be first to the bank in an attempt to retrieve their savings.
          Religion: Advocates a joining of religion and state. He seems to be confused, however, that prayer is not allowed in schools. It is permitted in schools so long as it is not a sanctioned event as it infringes on other children who believe in different things.
          Civil Rights: A lot of what he says on civil rights I agree with, such as freedom of the internet and freedom from limitless detention. He does, however, fail when it comes to marriage rights, stating that it should be for the state to decide. This is basically a cop out refusing to grant homosexual couples the same rights guaranteed to heterosexual couples while trying to avoid staining his own hands. By allowing the states to decide some will allow the rights while others, like Texas, will clearly deny them. That isn’t civil liberty at all.
          Abortion: Same as marriage. He is against it but leaves it to the states to decide so he does not dirty his hands. Same outcome with liberal states allowing it and conservative states denying it.
          Stem Cell Research: Same as marriage and abortion.
          Environment: Claims that government should not get involved in environmental activities but they would be better handled under private tort actions. This is ridiculous and has not been proven to work in practice for a number of reasons. The polluting companies have enough money to delay trials for a long time which private citizens can not afford. The companies have enough money to pay off citizens where it is clear that they will lose and still not alter their policies. Citizens are not sufficiently informed of their rights to even attempt these actions, which are unlikely to provide adequate protection. On top of this he goes against general scientific consensus to say that climate change is not a threat to the world.
          Health: He rejects universal healthcare saying that government involvement raises costs, which is just untrue if Sweden and Finland are anything to go by. The US simply needs reformed from trying to act as both a public and private health system at the same time. That is what is causing inflation in costs.
          Drugs: I agree with his views on drugs that the drug war isn’t working and is actually causing more harm than good, putting non-violent offenders in jail and funding organized crime.
          TL;DR: I agree with a number of his policies, and disagree with some others while respecting what he is aiming to achieve. But a lot of his policies are harmful and contradictory. As for his character he does not appear to be able to handle confrontation well, explaining the non-interventionist policy, and is not able to make decisions on truly controversial topics, as shown by attributing marriage rights, abortion and stem cell usage to state level rather than deal with it himself. In a President you want someone who looks out for the rights of all their people at all times, not someone who only looks out for their rights so long as it doesn’t upset a larger number of people at which point sends it to the larger number of people to decide what to do.
          Hopefully this has given you some insight into why people oppose him, mainly because they judge all of his policies instead of just the ones they agree with.

          Found here

          For the most part, these are his policies. He’s 50% good, 50% bad. He probably won’t get everything, but I like to think of Ron Paul as the nuclear option. When you compare him to anyone else in the field, he’s the only one that seems to make sense instead of supporting the system that is trying to get us in trouble. Take out of this what you will.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OAS4XNOMOBZQM66I5OILJMTNDI Teddy

        Most sensationalized post in this thread, bar none.

      • Anonymous

        #Correction

        174,000 does not include cost of living adjustments or internal adjustments.

        It’s fairly obvious you have no idea what you’re talking about, and I don’t even agree with Ron Paul [but everything you noted is taken out of context and/or incorrect].

        • Liberty for All

          Who cares if he didn’t contribute to his health insurance? When I look for a job, one of the factors are the benefits, if health insurance was important to me then I would look for a different job.

  • Mewoamix

    If ron paul doesnt win I will lose as much faith in america as I did when bush was elected a second term. Anyways check youtube for his videos if you are unsure, he actually has a history unlike obama.

  • http://crip.es/ Jarin

    I like that Ron Paul is against SOPA, but it’s pretty clear from hearing his “explanation” that he doesn’t really understand it. It was sort of like hearing Ted Stevens describe the Internet as a “series of tubes”.

  • Anonymous

    lol, yeah now anyways, dont worry, he’ll flip flop, they always do lol.
    http://www.Total-Privacy dot US

  • http://twitter.com/cris178 Cristian

    well i like this guy. and to all the people who say obama isnt doing anything he has done alot you guys should just watch more cnn. I mean most people were thinking he was gonna be a savior and change everything well here is a little something you should know it takes time to fix the economy i myself never thought he would be able to fix it in his term especially since the republicans are stopping all of his decisions. I know this is gonna hurt to hear but it must be said most people voted for obama in the first place because he was black. America became racially sensitive because of slavery. am not trying to be racist or anything just saying the truth. as proof you can even look at the record amount of voters during obamas run.

    • Guest

      LOL @ watch more CNN, that’s cute.

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/6EWDTDGGPM2NUB23WZXTLKO6DI Lorili

      While watching CNN make sure you read the New York Times and Washington Post to make sure you get your full dose of bullshit.

  • KlubMix

    fast way of getting votes

  • None

    His other positions aside, its good that someone at this level is even mentioning this. The only chance to stop SOPA is in the House, forget the Senate – Reid has the votes for SOPA and PIPA and no lobbying effort that comes from the left can break that. Ron Wyden is taking a heroic procedural stand. If just a couple of key Republicans can be flipped, it will collapse. Marsha Blackburn is one person being singled out, so if you want to take the time to send an email through the congressional website to someone – send it to her.

  • topherzero

    I’ve been following Ron Paul since 2008 and am very happy he is running again now. His campaign makes great strides because of the internet and the fact it is democratized where any citizen can have access. If we didn’t have that we would still have to rely on TV to get useful information and we know that television and the mainstream media aren’t really effective at that. He is getting my vote next year and I would urge youth to really listen to his views on the issues. To live in a free society we can’t have government control and this bill “SOPA” is just a disguise for stopping people from having control over a vast information network like the internet. Don’t be fooled as if politicians passing laws such as this are looking out for our best interest.

  • Matty84

    Ron Paul 2012.

  • Craig

    It’s a pity that he’s a racist.

    • IAMPIRATE

      RON PAUL IS NOT RACIST!!!!!!
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rv0Z5SNrF4&feature=player_embedded

      PLEASE, STOP LISTENING TO MAINSTREAM MEDIA, IT’S ALL LIES!!!!!!

      DO YOUR RESEARCH!!!!!!

      RON PAUL 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Anonymous

        No ,he just wrote racist articles, Admited they were his (in 96, tot he media) then suddenly came up with the ghostwriter angle in 2001.

        He also hates the civil rights act, and the voters rights act (because they’re ‘states rights’ things, just like how those same states called the national guard out to PREVENT implementation of those laws)

        And let’s not forget voting against a black woman getting a congressional gold medal, but voting FOR a white guy getting it.

        PLEASE STOP LISTENING TO A CANDIDATE’s CLAIMS BLINDLY, THEY:RE ALL LIES

        I did my research. Ron Paul supporters need to.
        I even found a nice picture of Ron with Don Black, former Grand Wizard of the KKK. Because, you know, those are the kind of people you hang around with when you’re NOT a racist….

        • Sergeant Castle

          While your perspective on these racist claims are interesting, they are not even remotely what I would consider sufficient evidence to incriminate a man who has spent his entire life serving his country. I am actually surprised a person who has been around as long as RP, does not have a heck of alot more dirt on him than this.

          In the words of Carl Sagan, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof”. This really isnt sufficient proof to weigh one way or another and I am trying to be entirely open minded.

        • Sick

          1) He never admitted to writing the letters, stop listening to slander on corporate-paid AIPAC-approved war-mongering television you love so much.

          2) He doesn’t “hate” the civil rights act, he said he would not have voted for it because it blurs the line between public and private property, setting a precedent that can be used in horrible ways later on. If you are incapable of understanding the issue and can only manage to grasp dumbed-down sound bytes like “hes a racist”, I feel sorry for you that you were born equipped with such a poorly functioning brain.

          3) He didn’t want to spend federal money on something the congress is not authorized to do by the constitution. Have you even read that constitution? This is the problem with the majority of Americans and people like yourself, you don’t know shit about what you are talking about and just like to run your mouth.

          You did no research, clearly. If you did, you would actually understand the issues and not just be lifting Rush Limbaugh and Wolf Blitzer sound bytes.

          Go ahead and vote for Mitt Romney or Obama and see what that gets you, but don’t go whining and crying when the USA is economically devastated, the free and open Internet is gone and your wife is fingered at the TSA security lines. This is clearly the future you want.

        • Anonymous

          @ Sick
          1) Ok then, amazing why he’s not sued something like the newspapers in Austin, because they’ve got published interviews with him, where THEY QUOTE HIM saying it. The only way you wouldn’t sue if you know you’re going to lose, and you know you’re going to lose when they can PROVE HE SAID IT.

          If your only answer is ‘someone paid for it’ then you’ve got bigger problems, including an inability to critically challenge your own positions. Oh, and it’s funny how it’s ‘warmongering television’, that’s ‘corporate paid’, when it’s a) newspapers, and b) written 15 years ago. Your conspiracy theory fails on the basic facts.

          2) I understand the issues all too well. I’ve yet to hear exactly WHAT precedents ‘that could be used in horrible ways’ there actually were. Since he made that claim in 09, I’ve actually sent his campaign letters asking for clarification on this, I’ve yet to get any response.

          3) He didn’t want to spend it on something it’s not authorised to do? That argument would hold weight IF he voted NAY on all the other ones in his time in office too. As I’ve already noted, he’s voted YES on these sorts of things at other times, when they’re White Men. Such as the New Frontier Congressional Gold Medal Act of 09 (gold medals for 4 white men). Whoops, sounds like his principles aren’t so strong now, eh?

          I’ve done lpenty of research.

          In fact, in 07, I had a good long chat with Paul’s campaign. Things were going REALLY well, until I started asking a few difficult questions, then they clammed up.
          I’m not reading a prepared speech, I’m not going by arbitary outside op-eds. I’m going by HIS words and HIS actions, and applying them to his claims. And I find them at odds with each other. Ron PAul is a politician, he lies. You’ve fallen for it. Accept it and move on.

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/6EWDTDGGPM2NUB23WZXTLKO6DI Lorili

      It’s a pity that some people believe any bullshit they’re fed.

    • Sick

      You’re a tool. The NAACP doesn’t defend racists.

  • Pingback: The list of SOPA supporters dwindles...kind of... by BadMoFo - Page 3 - TribalWar Forums

  • Pingback: Ron Paul opposes SOPA bill | Tech News Central

  • Sick

    @ktetch..

    I don’t think someone not suing someone over an allegation is evidence that the allegation is true. By that logic, I can call you a moron and because you haven’t sued me, it’s true. I haven’t been served yet, so I guess you ARE a moron? Just kidding, your words make this revelation self-evident.

    I shouldn’t need to come up with “examples” for you to see how dangerous the concept of re-defining the meaning of private property is. If you can’t envision ANY example of how that can be misused by the government, you are naive at best and completely stupid at worst.

    Getting focused and stuck on stupid wedge issues is the downfall of this country, nice to see you participate in it so enthusiastically. I guess that is how low you need to go in order to criticize someone who’s congressional record is perfectly in line with the constitution.

    Bottom line is if you don’t support Ron Paul you don’t support our constitution. You’re a foolish person and you will eventually pay for it. Keep voting for your candidates, see the future you create.

    • Anonymous

      Ah, the traditional republican reply ‘if you don’t support us, you’re against us’

      I don’t support Ron Paul, because I don’t support his reading of the constitution, because HIS version requires you to miss out a few words in the powers enumerated to Congress. “Provide for the common welfare”.

      When you get down to it, Paul’s plan is a mixture of anti-science rants, ideas that have already been tried and failed (why did we create the EPA, could it be because the free market DOESN’T regulate pollution?)

      We’ve had a financial collapse because of a lack of accountability in the banking sector. What’s Paul’s plan? Why, to do AWAY with what restrictions we had, such as the acts put in place after Worldcom/Enron (because, you know, the market prevented that from happening, as he planned it…. yeah…)

      Paul’s plan is basically to sell everything out to whoeever is the highest bidder, except the bits that are covered by his personal brand of ‘christianity’, where he wants to IGNORE the constitution, and IGNORE SCIENCE, and say an egg is a chicken, and abortion is wrong, because that’s the ‘christian position’.

      If you can’t see the internal inconsistancies in his policies, then more fool you.

      If you want to repeat the actions of the past, and hope to get a DIFFERENT result, then you’re clinically insane, since that is one definition.

      Vote Ron Paul, for an America the 18th Century would be proud of! Just a shame this is the 21st Century.

      • Streamlined67

        You are brilliant sir, completely brilliant, without you no one would be able to see these obvious things. I’m puzzled by your brilliant conclusions about the EPA especially since the EPA has failed completely to regulate the environment in any lasting sense.”AMG we can’t have certain levels of pollution on our own property so let’s build taller smokestacks.” The government has failed miserably to regulate everything and Ron Paul (if you actually took the time to listen to what he says) is not even suggesting that it should stop. He’s merely suggesting that it should be up to the state governments not the federal one. He does not care if you and whatever state you live in decide to do all kinds of crazy things like ban religion or give every crack addict a dime baggie, he only says that the money you use should come from your state not some handout from Washington’s borrowed money. Ron Paul is not going to change the way things go on in California, New York and Massachusetts, he’s not gonna descend and strip away all the social programming that people there enjoy or force them to end abortion, and gay marriage he just thinks that governments should not be borrowing money to pay for what it provides, simple, even you could understand it.

        Enron, World Com? What do these have to do with anything. Idk why you are talking about banks and Enron in the same sentence, the two examples are not the same or even similar. Enron committed fraud while the banks just accumulated massive bad loan portfolios. Businesses fail all the time with or without government meddling (Paul has never said that the free market will protect businesses from failing idk why you think he has). “Lack of accountability in the bank sector” Accountable to whom? Do you even know what that means or did you hear it on MSNBC? Banks have always only cared about making money and that is never ever going to change. Banks fail all the time and people lose money all the time. If you could step out of the tiny frame of your life you would see that this is a trait of history. It’s the way the world works and no amount of regulation is gonna take the greed out of the system, people want to speculate and make money. As for regulation what you fail to understand is that the regulators all want to work in the sectors they regulate. They often even collaborate with or take advice from those sectors which makes regulation a sad joke, (I’m sure even you know that the SEC brought Madoff on in an advisory position!) Besides even if you magically found perfectly brilliant and moral people to regulate, the system still would not work because politicians need money to get elected. Hence the main reason the government bailed out the major banks with TARP is because the TARP banks give major contributions to practically everyone’s campaign. So your logic is totally flawed because whatever you think restricting or regulating the banks and corporations is pointless if they own the politicians that make the laws and create the agencies to do the regulating. If you do some research (you know what this means right?) you will find that non investment banks have traditionally been barred from many investment related activities because such things were deemed too risky. Why was this ban lifted? Why was the reserve requirement for banks changed from 30 percent to 10 percent? BECAUSE THE BANKS CONTROL THE AGENCIES THAT TRY TO REGULATE THEM! If you can’t look at the events unfolding and see this then I just feel bad for you dude.

        Lol if you think Paul ignores the constitution that is just hilarious, have you even read the Constitution? If you have you must not have ever even heard him speak.

        Also your definition of clinical insanity needs a little work.

  • DeAuthThis

    My first time voting will be for you good sir

  • My two cents

    It’s nice to see TorrentFreak commenting about Ron Paul. Especially when it concerns very important issues regarding the civil liberties of the United States.

    Republican or Democrat, the majority are corporatists with different names. Ron Paul is one of the few that is not in it for glory and riches.

    To say that Obama is much different from GWB is wrong to tell the truth. Just look at the facts: We participated in Libya under Obama; troops have gotten pulled only very recently from Iraq; the millionaire tax break is still in affect; troops are STILL in Afghanistan. (We should have learned from the Soviets)

    Obama has big corporate buddies just like Bush does. Except they exist in different businesses. Obama = Insurance and Banks. GWB = Oil and Banks

  • Pingback: Episode 14 « Week In Review

  • Pingback: Hele verden demonstrerte! : STOPP SOPA!

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

  • Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

    Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation is a network mechanism through which many Internet subscribers can share the...

  • Feds Seize Cash from Major Bitcoin Exchange’s Dwolla Account

    The U.S. Government has taken a significant action against the web’s top Bitcoin exchange by seizing...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.