Ron Paul Recieves 91% in first straw-poll: Not Spammers

[ShadeHonestus]

Even with everything going on here and suffering an eye infection I could smell something rotten. Maybe it's that deal where one sense diminishes and the others are heightened.

his name is simply unknown thus far. the internet is the sleeping giant in american political voice, hopefully we can awaken it and Paul will make an impact.

Yes the last great bastion for unsupported fact and conspiracy nutjobs. It used to be that you had to get published for people to read drivel and if you couldn't gain the cred necessary you could find a rich man to sleep with, gain esoteric value by declaring yourself gay, and get sugardaddied a toilet paper rag in Greenwich entitled "the truth" or something else inherent in oxymorons. However, now the masses are subjected to it...well...en masse by the self perpetuating mass of ignorance. This is the same group that when they find themselves in college are shocked and outraged when you don't credit all their internet sources for collegiate level papers. They then drop out and sign up for some freesite to self publish their nonsense and when finding a like minded or rather a like absent-minded individual or individuals offering financial assistance in the form of a mocha latte cutback they gain hosting fees so they can continue to be counted among the prophets inherent in any fast food drive through. Ron Paul now enters the political stage and by summing his views in a rather misinformed fashion there are now thousands of little mocha latte starved drop outs typing that they've been validated.

No offense to fast food employees intended.

We could also chit chat about the EU (france is the driver) demanding that the U.S. cut subsidies to our farmers, but on the other the hand they will not. Now we cut subsidies and then we get killed by the south american producers.

Their is a lot to be discussed when it comes to subsidies and although I realize the point of your post was not to delve into their substance, this is an oversimplification of the issue. I do have to say thanks for bringing up the topic. Although they have their time and place the reality is that every president in the last 25 years has wanted to reinvent or eliminate farm subsidies, but they quickly find that they cannot politically. During the farm crisis there had to be help for the individual farmer, but it came way too little too late. Now what has evolved is a form of corporate welfare practically unrivaled, not to mention it flies in the face of its original purpose. Generally speaking the landowner gets paid a subsidy for each acre of producing land. The ignored fact is that it takes the same overhead in equipment, labor, etc to produce on 5000 acres as it does 1000. Naturally the evolved state is now that which pays millions to large corporate farms without a scaling reduction for total acres. The last bastion for the little guy to expand is rent farming and unfortunately here, the producer isn't given the subsidy but rather the landlord and rarely is it factored into the rent price. The problem needs to be addressed with new markets for existing crops, especially ethanol (ethanol refineries popping up every 25 miles here) emerging the market has the opportunity to correct itself and turn more profitable for every farmer. Keeping our political wits about us and not selling out to South America being key.

For fairness I should state that I own a considerable portion of a sizable corporate farm...although it was only incorporated to take advantage of liability/tax breaks to save the family farm during the crisis, 90% of my former neighbors weren't that lucky.

-I now return to my previously scheduled onset of blindness