Ron Paul is a "Homophobe" who Supports "Black Water": Mike Gravel says to Harvard Democrats(subtly)

I didn’t see or hear that.

I don’t trust Gravel. He’s dead wrong in a lot of areas, but he doesn’t seem slandorous to me (I could be wrong, of course).

you unless you are a very important person.So I guess
Ron Paul has reached stardom!
Old Mikeyboy can only dream of having supporters as loyal as
we are.

..and it will go away

Democrats are generally not to be trusted. The only exception I can think of is Kucinich, and even then I still wouldn't vote for him.

Liberals are not our friends.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

Make it something like.. Gravel is not one of us

Your title is raking up old stuff and off putting if you ask me.. once again bringing this homophobic issue to the fore which has been dealt with quite some time ago.

This is about Gravel, not about Ron Paul

is a leftist trying to morph into a Libertarian because he just wants to get into a gov't job.

IMO, he's never been any good, and he doesn't seem to be getting any better.

Gravel isn't even on my radar.

The Libertarian Party candidate list is here:
http://www.lp.org/liberty...

It will be interesting to see if Ron Paul winds up endorsing the LP candidate at the end of the day. As far as I have heard, he has not ruled out endorsing outside of the Republican Party.

The LP spends a lot of time and money on ballot access, and it's not surprising that some candidates want to piggyback on that access instead of the uphill effort requires for independent runs.

That said, I'm not sure how many libertarians would actually vote for folks like Gravel. I watched the long Bob Barr segment on Glenn Beck recently, and he sounded more like a Goldwater Republican than a libertarian to many of the questions. I'm not sure if he was angling for the audience or not, but I suspect that if the libertarian party base votes, it's likely that we won't see Barr or Gravel on the ballot competing against Obama/Sebelius and McCain/Pawlenty.

I'll be happy to confirm it again. I saw the video is which Mike Gravel said being against world government equals "bad thinking."

________________________________________________________________
"let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our freedoms & wealth are in jeoprady"
Ron Paul

"Walls are stronger than the men that defend them."

Ghengis Khan

listened to him on radio...all for the U.N. playing major role...don't sound like a liberterian to me....just my opinion....sounds like the Dems or the Repubs..

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master... George Washington

What a shame.

I thought he was a good guy until I heard about this...he's lost what respect I once had for him.

Unforgivable garbage.... Rot in hell Mike =)

____ _____ _____ _____ ______ ______ _____ ___
"The time is near at hand which we must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves."

George Washington
First President of the USA.
http://digitaldiesel.net/...

________________________________________________________________
"let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our freedoms & wealth are in jeoprady"
Ron Paul

I'll admit to be a Libertarian first, and a Ron Paul supporter second. I voted for Paul back in 1988, and haven't voted Democratic or Republican since. This run of Paul in 2008, however, was enough to get me over even on the Republican ticket. I like the ideas more than the labels.

That said, the policy requirements of many Libertarians are as pure as the driven snow, and there a large number of candidates who seem to want to take advantage of this party's state ballot access without first considering the philosophical requirements of the movement.

http://www.lp.org/issues/...

Who else is running for the LP nomination? Gravel? Barr? Ruwart? Ventura?

Frankly, I'd probably take my chances with any of these candidates over what we're going to get with Obama or McCain. That said, one challenge the LP always has is the purity of those under the umbrella. Since the policies are based in philosophy and reason (unlike the other parties), there's not going to be a warm reception for compromisers, be it for National Health Care or anything else that's a less obvious offense. I'm not sure if Gravel and Barr fully understand that.

_________bump_______________________________________________________
"let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeoprady"

Congressman Ron Paul

the morons from the democratic party infiltrated the republican party and took it over... now they are going to screw up the libertarian party.. I just hope those in that party boot this idiot moron to the curb where he belongs!

as for me and my home, we shall worship the LORD

No M "Suck" G for me.

bump

. . . NOT! Gravel's a one-worlder who wants an omnipotent government. Why in the world he thinks he's going to get the Libertarian nomination, of all parties, is beyond me. Proves he's not only malevolent, but clueless as well.

Gravel thinks he can raise a lot of money with a libertarian message. It's like, *Poof* "I'm a Libertarian now, send me money."

How he soooooo doesn't get it.

Mike Gravel's "Mob Rule initiative" and U.N. LOVE FEST exposed by Scott Horton on Antiwarradio interview. Expose starts at 07:55 till the end
http://antiwar.com/radio/...

Tar and Feather Gravel

is Ron Paul has found a way to be as libertarian as possible, yet be a Republican. I believe Ron Paul is first and foremost a libertarian, who has compromised with a few positions that took him just a step in the conservative direction. An example would be the libertarian call to not only abolish the IRS, but also abolish the INS. That agencies powers far exceeds the power found at your local police station.

From this interview, one can view Mike Gravel as a liberal trying to be as libertarian as possible. It is not the other way around, that is a libertarian who has compromised with a few positions that took him just a step in the liberal direction. Which brings up an interesting point. Just what would a libertarian look like, sound like, if indeed he took just a step to the left? He may just be where Mike Gravel is today. Pro gay marriage, pro mother's choice (fathers get no "choice"), against any privatization of the military and for public schools. But unlike the liberals, for the 2nd amendment, against taxes, against an interventionist foriegn policy, etc. I am sure one day soon we will start seeing and hearing of a democrat, who is mostly libertarian except on a few issues.

Libertarians start out with the idea that all Humans have the right to their own Life, Liberty and Property. Libertarians call this the Principle of Individual Rights. From this principle, they see the Constitution as built around it, respecting the sovereignty of man rights. They start from this individual rights premise, and try to use that as litmus tests for policy. Should drug war end? Should prostitution be legal? Is free trade good or bad? and so forth, always noting the fact no aggression, force, the threat of force was used, for if they did, it would all entail the violation of someones individual rights. Good government respects individual rights yet at the same time protects individual rights.

Back to Ron Paul. He skirts around the immigration and gay marriage and abortion issues in a skillful fashion, making sure he does not violate individual rights in the process. His arguments deserve fair critique in libertarian circles. As a politician, these 3 issue stances moved him over into the Republican party. But on the Death Penalty issue, Ron Paul shows us he is reasonable man, open to reason, facts, figures and comparative analysis. The irony is that in 1988, while running as a libertarian presidential candidate, he was for the Death Penalty. But as he explained in one of the debates, he has changed his position on that issue. What he has not explained, or fully explained, is how he moved from thinking evolution was a scientific factually based theory thats not been disproved, to one that needs more evidence. He has not explained how he went from despising the INS, viewing the INS as yet another government agency creating the illegals problem in the first place, massive miss-use of government powers and massive civil rights violations including (at the time), its treatment of the little Cuban boy, forcing him back to Cuba, to today being a card carrying member of the Anti-illegals team. The only good thing was he was not for a wall, America's own Iron Curtain or Berlin Wall if you will, and he was not for making illegals out to be "scapegoats". His call to get illegals off of welfare and filling our hospitals should have been one more reason for the libertarian Blue Card solution to all those who enter after a back ground check. (The Blue Card does not entitle anyone social welfare benefits). Dr. Schoolland, professor of economics has done good work in this area showing that illegals do not move or travel great distances for social welfare benefits at all... nor does any of our local American population. They move for jobs and the immediate cash that earns them. Ron Paul of 1988 knew all of this, yet sounded on the campaign trail as yet another "anti-illegal republican" who fails to see that it was government in the first place causing the long impassible lines at the borders with no other means to enter but illegally. Farmers understand this, the American public does not. Much like the drug war, illegal immigration is a government created problem.

As usual, freedom is the answer.

Gravel is a way left leaning socialist nutcase, without any morals, and is against anything the Constitution stands for. He should be stripped of his citizenship and sent to Amsterdam, where all the other nutcase socialists reside.

Ron Paul is a libertarian. Gravel is not. Gravel does not understand the Doc's positions from a libertarian perspective and probably never will.

Either Gravel is seriously misinformed (which is unbelievable as a Presidential candidate), he's been bought off by someone, or he's just trying to get attention any way that he can. In any case, I just lost all respect for him. He's clearly a moron who doesn't know what he's talking about or he's a moron who's turned to the dark side. Either way, he deserves no respect from anyone calling themselves a Libertarian. I'm not a Libertarian, I'm a Ron Paul Republican!

is not genuine. He just panders to the people in front of him. I don't need to see anymore about this scumbag,

slimey politician, jerk, Ahole ,nutbag, cooty infested, two faced,heaping pile,
of smelly $hit.

oops,

Gravel will say something good, but overall I would never put my support behind him. I don't think Gravel even knows where he really stands on many issues. He doesn't seem to be a libertarian to me.

I too have heard much Gravel good stuff but knew I was missing something. I really detest what he said about Ron Paul as if he knows he is right. Then he turns around quickly and makes a play for Ron's support. He wants to try to get Ron's support. Everyone wants "us." Ron Paul has us for a huge reason. Integrity.

You are dead to Gravel. Dead to me.