“Don’t listen to George Stephanopoulos! Vote for freedom! Vote for Ron Paul!” yelled one member of the sign-waving pack.
Stephanopoulos, the host of ABC’s Sunday-morning This Week and that night’s speaker at the Folly Theater, a few blocks away, had argued on his show that Paul had no chance of being elected the next president of the United States.
Like adolescent boys spewing stats on their favorite basketball players, the citizens on the corner hyped the credentials of their long-shot presidential hopeful, a 10-term Republican congressman from the Texas Gulf Coast. Aside from those dozen or so ralliers on October 30, Paul has a legion of followers on the Internet — more than 72,000 volunteers from nearly 1,300 local MeetUp.com groups, far more than any other candidate. On November 5, Paul’s supporters donated more than $4.2 million, making it the largest single fundraising day in presidential campaign history. Paul is a Navy veteran, a licensed obstetrician and gynecologist and an amateur economist devoted to abolishing the IRS and returning the country’s monetary policy to the gold standard. He’s anti-war, anti-big business and anti-federal government. He was opposed to giving Rosa Parks (along with everyone else ever nominated) the Congressional Medal of Freedom, arguing that Congress has no constitutional authority to bestow such an award upon anyone.
Nationally, his followers range from left-leaning college students to neocons who supported Bush in '04.
One of the main local organizers is Deb Wells, who worked at Sprint for 14 years and was a vice president of North American operations at Archos, a consumer electronics company; she’s done legal research on a contract basis for the past two years. She says she’s seen firsthand how the corporate structure at a company like Sprint can cause a climate of confusion, alienation and distrust among employees who are simply looking for a reliable pension. “He won’t take any contributions from corporations like that,” Wells says of Paul. “That says to me that he is a genuine upstanding citizen who is for people.”
Other group members echo Wells’ sentiments about the growing discontent of America’s workforce. Many say that cities would benefit from Paul’s plan to abolish the federal income tax and banking systems. “Employees of the Federal Reserve branch, the IRS and H&R Block will lose their parasitic jobs and need to find productive work, but there will be plenty of jobs available when we are free again,” says Michael Kerner, 60, an engineer at Honeywell and a district coordinator of the Kansas Libertarian Party.
Others speak of their persistent frustrations with the two major political parties. “I don’t want to live in an empire, nor in a welfare state forcibly redistributing wealth,” says 49-year-old IT worker John Weir.
Linda Powell, meanwhile, is worried about the ongoing development of Kansas City SmartPort, an inland customs facility in the West Bottoms where American and Mexican officials would inspect U.S.-made exports. She fears this may evolve into foreign-controlled inspection of imported goods coming into America through Kansas City. “If we lose our borders and sovereignty, every other issue is moot,” she says.
But when interests are so varied, issues can collide.
At a November 2 fundraiser, the Kansas City group, in collaboration with the Jackson County group, sold $22 tickets for a night of Ron Paul videos, speakers and entertainment by a handful of pro-Paul bands. Around 70 supporters, some familiar with the cause and others new to it, attended the event at the Uptown Theater. Missouri State Rep. Jim Guest of King City said a few words about the cause, then organizers introduced Dave VonKleist, host of The Power Hour, a radio talk show broadcast from Versailles, Missouri, and heard locally on KCXL 1140.
Showing 1-14 of 14
I watched one video on youtube about Ron Paul (about 3 weeks ago), and ever since I've been scouring political information online; his principles and ideals are inspiring, and this article doesn't do him justice.
I'm glad to see him in the Pitch, but I'd hoped for more meaningful content...
As the person being quoted so often in this write-up, I am absolutely shocked to see that my comments were totally taken out of context and that Mark and James, the actual ORGANIZERS of the Kansas City Area Team and the Jackson County Team who spoke with John Amick were not quoted or even mentioned!
Just to clear up a few things, first of all I did NOT imply that Sprint was a terrible place - it is one that contains a lot of politics, and JOHN AMICK, I told you that our teams were refreshed because we work from the bottom up, NOT FROM THE TOP DOWN LIKE a large company does. In a different discussion, we told you that Dr. Paul does not take money from corporations or special interests because HE DOES NOT WANT to OWE THEM ANYTHING when he gets into office.
Secondly, I LOVE working with so many different people on our teams and like I told John Amick, THAT IS WHY IT IS SO interesting and challenging for me. I in no way implied that it is TOO HARD to work with the people I've met through our groups! It was in very bad taste to follow up this spin with an implication that interest began to wane after our successful concert at the Uptown Theater. That is absolutely UNTRUE - my comment, a full MONTH after the concert, was that we were working our tails off and the only time I see a break may be around the holidays.
Yes, there was some open discussion about Dave VonKleist's presentation - it wasn't everyone's cup of tea, but GUESS WHAT? THE PEOPLE WHO LEFT EARLY ARE ON OUR TEAMS AND WORKING HARD TO GET RON PAUL ELECTED. That is the beauty of FREEDOM - people actually get to talk about ANYTHING THEY WANT and people actually get to LIKE IT or NOT LIKE IT. It's OK in a FREE COUNTRY - get it?
THEN, to top that off, it was implied that we broke off into different teams right after the concert and email discussion back & forth. Again, a full month after the concert, we broke off into two teams - THE REASON WE HAVE TWO TEAMS IS to focus on KANSAS Caucuses / campaign plans versus MISSOURI primaries / campaign plans because they are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PROCESSES! You were AT THE GRASSROOTS TRAINING SESSION - YOU KNOW THIS FOR A FACT.
Finally, at our grassroots training meeting, nobody "ARGUED" about anything. We had an open discussion about how we might want to canvass and left it at that. Nothing is set in stone, and to imply that we "argued" about it means those with some experience acted like they were superior or something.
I'm DISGUSTED.
Deborah Wells,
Totally amazed that people think it's perfectly fine to lie right to people's faces
In this article you stated that "He was opposed to giving Rosa Parks (along with everyone else ever nominated) the Congressional Medal of Freedom, arguing that Congress has no constitutional authority to bestow such an award upon anyone."
These kinds of statements are why people are confused by what Dr. Paul does. Stating that Congress has no Constitutional authority to bestow such an award is not accurate, he stated (see my reference at the end of this comment), that congress should not be spending tax payers MONEY for this award.
Dr. Pauls speach...
"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. "
Reference: http://www.house.gov/paul/cong...
In regards to the article on Congressman Ron Paul, I have to state I was disappointed. As I began about Dr. Paul being a long shot, and not getting media attention, I could not agree more. I also found the "E-Candidate," article to be constructive when pointing out Dr. Paul's strict adherence to the United States Constitution.
Most Americans can echo a distrust of big government, large corporations, and the IRS. Why not elaborate on Dr. Paul's position on bringing troops home from Iraq? Mr. Amick could have shared that Congressman Paul is endorsed by the VFW, the Veterans of Foreign War, due to his constant fight to ensure that those that are or have served in the military have their medical and veterans rights protected.
My disgust in the article is the deviation of the topic. I want to hear about the candidate, not miniscule bits of hearsay. The Pitch was informing the public of an outstanding Congressman, Ron Paul, running for the office of President of the United States. Amick would have demonstrated greater journalism skills had he remained focus on Dr. Paul.
I watched one video on youtube about Ron Paul (about 3 weeks ago), and ever since I've been scouring political information online; his principles and ideals are inspiring, and this article doesn't do him justice. I'm glad to see him in the Pitch, but I'd hoped for more meaningful content...
As the person being quoted so often in this write-up, I am absolutely shocked to see that my comments were totally taken out of context and that Mark and James, the actual ORGANIZERS of the Kansas City Area Team and the Jackson County Team who spoke with John Amick were not quoted or even mentioned! Just to clear up a few things, first of all I did NOT imply that Sprint was a terrible place - it is one that contains a lot of politics, and JOHN AMICK, I told you that our teams were refreshed because we work from the bottom up, NOT FROM THE TOP DOWN LIKE a large company does. In a different discussion, we told you that Dr. Paul does not take money from corporations or special interests because HE DOES NOT WANT to OWE THEM ANYTHING when he gets into office. Secondly, I LOVE working with so many different people on our teams and like I told John Amick, THAT IS WHY IT IS SO interesting and challenging for me. I in no way implied that it is TOO HARD to work with the people I've met through our groups! It was in very bad taste to follow up this spin with an implication that interest began to wane after our successful concert at the Uptown Theater. That is absolutely UNTRUE - my comment, a full MONTH after the concert, was that we were working our tails off and the only time I see a break may be around the holidays. Yes, there was some open discussion about Dave VonKleist's presentation - it wasn't everyone's cup of tea, but GUESS WHAT? THE PEOPLE WHO LEFT EARLY ARE ON OUR TEAMS AND WORKING HARD TO GET RON PAUL ELECTED. That is the beauty of FREEDOM - people actually get to talk about ANYTHING THEY WANT and people actually get to LIKE IT or NOT LIKE IT. It's OK in a FREE COUNTRY - get it? THEN, to top that off, it was implied that we broke off into different teams right after the concert and email discussion back & forth. Again, a full month after the concert, we broke off into two teams - THE REASON WE HAVE TWO TEAMS IS to focus on KANSAS Caucuses / campaign plans versus MISSOURI primaries / campaign plans because they are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PROCESSES! You were AT THE GRASSROOTS TRAINING SESSION - YOU KNOW THIS FOR A FACT. Finally, at our grassroots training meeting, nobody "ARGUED" about anything. We had an open discussion about how we might want to canvass and left it at that. Nothing is set in stone, and to imply that we "argued" about it means those with some experience acted like they were superior or something. I'm DISGUSTED. Deborah Wells, Totally amazed that people think it's perfectly fine to lie right to people's faces
In this article you stated that "He was opposed to giving Rosa Parks (along with everyone else ever nominated) the Congressional Medal of Freedom, arguing that Congress has no constitutional authority to bestow such an award upon anyone." These kinds of statements are why people are confused by what Dr. Paul does. Stating that Congress has no Constitutional authority to bestow such an award is not accurate, he stated (see my reference at the end of this comment), that congress should not be spending tax payers MONEY for this award. Dr. Pauls speach... "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. " Reference: http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec99/cr042099.htm
In regards to the article on Congressman Ron Paul, I have to state I was disappointed. As I began about Dr. Paul being a long shot, and not getting media attention, I could not agree more. I also found the "E-Candidate," article to be constructive when pointing out Dr. Paul's strict adherence to the United States Constitution. Most Americans can echo a distrust of big government, large corporations, and the IRS. Why not elaborate on Dr. Paul's position on bringing troops home from Iraq? Mr. Amick could have shared that Congressman Paul is endorsed by the VFW, the Veterans of Foreign War, due to his constant fight to ensure that those that are or have served in the military have their medical and veterans rights protected. My disgust in the article is the deviation of the topic. I want to hear about the candidate, not miniscule bits of hearsay. The Pitch was informing the public of an outstanding Congressman, Ron Paul, running for the office of President of the United States. Amick would have demonstrated greater journalism skills had he remained focus on Dr. Paul.
http://www.teaparty07.com/
Drink LiberTEA at the Teaparty, Dec 16, 2007. Drink it for the first time.
All other candidates DENY LIBERTY.
Ron Paul is the greatest candidate I've ever seen. Consistent for 30 years. No flip flops. We are done with WAR, we want a real currency, we want peace, we want the welfare-state for the military industrial complex to END, we want to fix America and stop policing the world and to stop the authoritarian oppression here NOW.
Here is what the US Government without Ron Paul in charge has done to us:
- 9 trillion in debt
- 850 billion trade deficit
- War in Iraq
- War in Afghanistan
- Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda alive
- Fomenting War with Iran
- 12.25 trillion M3 money supply, and expanding (massive inflation)
Ron Paul�s record is crystal clean perfect and consistent. He takes no money from anyone but people and constituents. He is as pure as they come.
One of my favorite quotes about Dr. Paul, �You�re working for the most honest man in Congress.� That was John McCain speaking to Kent Snyder in 1988.
http://www.teaparty07.com/ Drink LiberTEA at the Teaparty, Dec 16, 2007. Drink it for the first time. All other candidates DENY LIBERTY. Ron Paul is the greatest candidate I've ever seen. Consistent for 30 years. No flip flops. We are done with WAR, we want a real currency, we want peace, we want the welfare-state for the military industrial complex to END, we want to fix America and stop policing the world and to stop the authoritarian oppression here NOW. Here is what the US Government without Ron Paul in charge has done to us: - 9 trillion in debt - 850 billion trade deficit - War in Iraq - War in Afghanistan - Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda alive - Fomenting War with Iran - 12.25 trillion M3 money supply, and expanding (massive inflation) Ron Paul’s record is crystal clean perfect and consistent. He takes no money from anyone but people and constituents. He is as pure as they come. One of my favorite quotes about Dr. Paul, “You’re working for the most honest man in Congress.” That was John McCain speaking to Kent Snyder in 1988.
like
dislike
