Article Image
News Link • Media: Internet

Ron Paul -- The 2012 TIME 100 Poll

Cast your votes for the leaders, artists, innovators, icons and heroes that you think are the most influential people in the world. Official voting ends on Friday, April 6, and the poll winner will be included in the TIME 100 issue. The complete TIME 100 list will be chosen by our editors and revealed on on Tuesday, April 17.

20 Comments in Response to

Comment by Sam Weathersby
Entered on:

JV needs to stop eating cactus buttons.  He & those who oppose Ron Paul seem to be hung up on raw milk, which was not the issue in the 1st place. Freedom & liberty to choose is the subject of Ron Paul's stance. I drank raw milk for several years before the dairy lobbyists stepped in to curtail this freedom to increase their own $ margin. I never got sick even once. You JV fascist/communist/Marxist/socialists big brother lovers make me sick. Raw milk just made me healthy.

JV is the poster child for an easy to manipulate useful idiot Homer Simpson tool. 

JV & co tacitly express a love for the coming 1984 type govt. Yo, Homers, who would YOU suggest as a better, more Constitution centered candidate over Ron Paul? There is no one in the 2 'parties' running who is better or more consistent.

 If there is a freedom candidate better than Ron Paul, tell us who it is & why. I notice a lot of criticism of Ron but few if any citations...I wonder why that is.

Some other Homer S said something about Ron Paul blaming America for 9-11 but did NOT back up their disingenuous remark.  Which is typical of Paul detractors. 

Go to YouTube & look up 

Did blowback cause 9-11 by the southern avenger

9-11, war & why Ron Paul's foreign policy is right

So you like Ron Paul, except on Foreign Policy combat veterans for Ron Paul

Reality Check Ron Paul news letters exposed Ben Swann

You can copy & paste the above phrases @ YT 

Who's the idiot talking up how great the govt is at protecting us?  Lord! If the govt is protecting us I would sure hate to see what they'd do if they were out to destroy the Constitution. You must love going to the airport, warrant-less searches & wiretaps & checkpoints. I take it you Homers also love the collapse the system agenda Cloward & Pivon wrote about.

It would sure give ya some credence JV, if you & the other Homer Simpsons knew what you were talking about. 

Go ahead, hit me with your Rules For Radicals crap. So far that's all you have posted any way & I'm used to it. 




Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Gee, JV. You are getting to sound like Hitler's propaganda writers more and more all the time. But, then, why not? Everyone who wants a one-world government rather than freedom will need to espouse many of the ideals of Hitler and his like.

Comment by Ana Panot
Entered on:

By the time you two finished this argument, PureTrust will be so beat up that he will attempt to think straight for survival ... believe me ... heh, heh, ha, ha, hooo!

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

The last paragraph of my comment below should read: You are not aware [where have you been?] that our national security programs are changing too. Aside from the recently passed NDAA law that deprived due process to detained terrorists and terrorist suspects, more national security laws are coming. We are tightening the rope around the neck of the Enemy of the State within and without, under the obvious determination of the U.S. Government to defeat terrorists and win the war on terror.. Now, PureTrust – you didn’t know anything about this, did you?


Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

Puretrust, sorry to remind you again for the nth time that lately your comments are off the rack – too far off the issue being discussed. This time, the issue on the table is the "polling" of the world’s most influential personalities for the 2012 TIME 100 awards. You wasted your time in enumerating the reasons for your prejudice against the U.S. Government, then you parroted about the "changes" that "Ron Paul and his organization" had introduced that you claimed have worked in the past. You are mentally miles off the track!

The 2012 TIME 100 polling award is NOT interested in your Government prejudice, not to mention the fact that the "faults" of your Government are NOT the issue in the discussion that TIME 100 polling was interested about!

Having said that, and now speaking of the "troubles" you have listed down in your miles-apart [irrelevant] comment, why do you accuse the Government of causing those "troubles"? The Enemy of the Government and saboteurs are the problems. They caused all these troubles, don’t you know? And you accused the Government of not doing anything about it? How crazy could that turned out to be?

Listen carefully: The Government has done a lot, and still continue to change the troubled situation that your kind are creating, in favor of the American public.

For example, terrorists, terrorist suspects, terrorist coddlers and anti-Government activists like your kind have not succeeded in doing another 911. That they and your kind were unable to do any mass killing and massive destructions since 911 is already a great achievement of the Government in protecting you and me. It is an immensely great accomplishment of the Government that boggles your imagination (assuming that you have any imagination at all or if you have, it is not in Cloud 9 where your mind dwells most of the time).

You are not aware [where have you been?] that our national security programs are changing too. Aside from the recently passed NDAA law that deprived due process to detained terrorists and terrorist suspects, more national security laws are coming. We are tightening the rope around the neck of the Enemy of the State within and without, under obvious the determination of the U.S. Government to defeat terrorists and win the war on terror.. Now, PureTrust – you didn’t know anything about this, did you?

Comment by Bertha Anonimo
Entered on:

There is a comment below which came from the "lunatic fringe". It refers to "changes" that Ron Paul and his organization will bring to America. The loony love of Ron Paul is in blue.

What kind of "changes" are those? Are you referring to "whacky" changes and screwy ideas that the New Hampshire newspaper described as wild and crazy coming from the "lunatic fringe"?

Even if we jump into your bed of lunacy blindfolded and pretend to believe the crow is white not black, similar to a make-belief that Ron Paul will bring changes to America -- what changes are you talking about that he will bring to America?

Right now public safety health regulations prohibit the production and sale of raw milk without being pasteurized, as well as eating unregulated dairy products that will cause you and the other people you contaminate, to get sick and spread an epidemic. On record, Ron Paul had change these health-safety regulations to freedom to drink unpasteurized raw milk, and with it the freedom to contract a disease caused by Salmonella, E. Coli and Listeria. This is just one of Ron Paul's whacky changes that you are talking about out of the many nutty ones that are repulsive or a no-no, no, no, to the American public.

The problems of the Nation you are talking about that are so irrelevant to the issue, does not make Ron Paul the solution -- that he is your solution only exists in your pretty much screwed up imagination. The reality is a change for the worst that he is, yes, he is.

It seemly means that you are a bad compulsive gambler because your best bet on him for a change is actually your worst. Had the New Hampshire newspaper not described you and your kind as Ron Paul's disciples from the "lunatic fringe", I might have believed you, assuming that I am worse than what the New Hampshire newspaper had already described you what you really are.

If Mr. Smith doesn’t like the Government for reasons of his own, it does not mean that he likes Ron Paul. To assume that he does, is lunacy. Although you love yourself in the mirror thinking that you are Ron Paul, Mr. Smith for all you know, might have hated Ron Paul worse than he despised his mother-in-law.

The fallacy of your argument is obviously the apex of an afflicted mind, which the National Institute of Health described as a form of "mental illness".

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Thanks, as usual, JV, for helping me to bring up some of the great Ron Paul points.

Do we have any turmoil in the U.S.? Are people in trouble economically? Are our soldiers dying in wars? Are people dying from legal drugs? Is there police brutality? Are Americans being thrown into jail for using their free rights? YES!

Do Americans like it this way? NO!

Is it the current and recent (last 4 decades, at least) Government administrations who have led the people into their problems? Is it the current administration that is keeping the people in their problems? Is it the form of administration now in office that would further American woes if it is allowed to continue? Is it a bunch of conceited, "smart," graduates of law and economic schools that are running these administrations? Are they making a mess of America on purpose? YES!

Is it time for change? YES!

Is Ron Paul alone in his campaign? NO!

Does Ron Paul have many advisers that have many years of schooling and education in economics and law? YES!

So, let everybody understand. The ways Governmental operations are being done now are not working for the benefit of the American people. It's obvious. Just look across America to see it.

The ways that Ron Paul and his organization are proposing to make changes, have worked in the past, and will work again. We can have a strong America if we change back to what works.

Vote Ron Paul 2012. And if he is not on the ballot, write him in. And record the event with your cell-cam.

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

In the comment of PureTrust (#010621) posted 03-29-2012 below, he informed the public that it was publisher Ernest Hancock and "a few of his friends" who "convinced" Ron Paul to run for President under "a Constitutionality-for-America platform". And Ron Paul supposedly agreed.

But what for? Everybody with a sound mind knows that Ron Paul does not have even a Chinaman’s chance to win a GOP nomination, much more win the presidential election. Is PureTrust attempting to malign Ernie by insinuating that he was only USING Ron Paul for a personal purpose? Making a profit out of Ron Paul’s LOSING candidacy for President is in the mind of the American public – and that is, profiteers are making a good business out of Ron Paul’s candidacy.

And for such a stupid excuse that Ron Paul is running under "a Constitutionality-for-America platform" is even so moronic. This explains why Ron Paul has been "forced" to declare in public and became the butt of the joke that he is an expert on constitutional issues, calling himself a "Constitutionalist" and the people just started laughing.

Did you know how many years one has to go to a graduate law school to specialize in the study of the Constitution and earned a diploma to become one of the few Constitutionalists we have in the country today? Ron Paul is NOT a Constitutionalist by any stretch of the imagination! He specialized on delivering babies. He is not even a lawyer. No one is a Constitutionalist by pulling the heads of babies out of the mother’s womb.

By using Ron Paul’s candidacy as a private business for profit, this poor politician from Texas was also "forced" to declare himself as an "expert" on Monetary Economics and became a laughing stock. Like to become a Constitutionalist, this likewise requires years of specialization in the graduate school of Economics. No one ever became one by delivering babies like Ron Paul did. Ron Paul was never an expert in Economics by any stretch of the imagination!

So what do we have … a fake expert in Monetary Economics, and a bogus Constitutionalist politician who pretended to be someone he never was. And a few uneducated followers started to believe that he is a genuine expert in both delusional pretensions or on both planned con artist’s deceptions for profit!

Do you still wonder why Ron Paul could not even get a GOP presidential nomination?

This guy PureTrust is exposing Ernie as a USER [maybe "unwittingly" to give him the benefit of the doubt] – who is taking advantage of a not quite smart politician for his own private commercial scheme for profit and personal libertarian binge.

I am bringing out this deeply hidden animosity of a guy towards Ernie who pretends to be his friend. I feel sad for bringing out this "secret" to the open. But I have to, as it is becoming more and more obvious to the public. Never treat the American public like a bunch of retarded that does not know what is going on behind their back. They are much smarter than you think!

Comment by Courtney Jalospanis
Entered on:

I read comment #010621 by PureTrust – a committed Ron Paul supporter. Read his weird "proposal" (?) below and you will have a clear idea why the New Hampshire newspaper called his followers oddballs from the "lunatic fringe". There is no doubt it -- the New Hampshire newspaper was right.

Comment by Venancio Tan
Entered on:

Comment from the "lunatic fringe": "Isn't it time we get the terrorists out of Government?" Geewish ...! Yaaahoy, ohhhh boy!. You are right. It's about time. But I thought you love Ron Paul who is in Government for more than 20 years doing nothing except terrorize the Government with such lunacy as the "freedom" to drink bacteria-laden raw milk and kill people while self-proclaiming himself as a freedom-loving "Constitutionalist" and an "expert" in monetary economics by telling Fed Chairman Bernanke that a token silver coin is a "legal tender" people should use for buying their groceries! Ay, Mama mia ...!

How do you propose to get rid of him? Yeah, my man … go man goooo! I’m behind you, breathing hard right down on your neck! Tell them how you would get rid of "terrorists" in the Government starting from Ron Paul. No sane American listens to you, but I assure you that your kind from the "lunatic fringe" will.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

You are so far out of it that you are pathetic.

If Government really wanted to protect Americans from terrorists, the first thing that they would do is re-activate ALL American civilians that had been in the military at some time or other. Government would arm them with the latest weapons, and order them to stay at home and protect their neighborhoods.

Next, Government would set up application forms for any of the rest of the people who wanted to become para-military personnel in the same capacity as the, above, former military people who had been re-activated. And Gov would train them and supply them similarly as necessary.

Following that, if the threat still existed - which it wouldn't, because it virtually doesn't exist now - Gov would require EVERYBODY to become para-military as stated above.

Since Government is NOT doing the above, and since it is doing just the opposite - trying to disarm Americans in every way that it can, against the SPIRIT of the 2nd Amendment, and probably the LETTER as well - one can easily see that it is Government who is the terrorist.

Now let me qualify the point that Government is the terrorist. At its foundation, Government is the Constitution. And, therefore, at its foundation, Government is NOT a terrorist. Government terrorists are the people in Government who will not obey their Oath of Office to uphold the Constitution, but, in fact, are doing just the opposite.

Isn't it time we get the terrorists out of Government?

Vote Ron Paul 2012. And if he is not on the ballot, write him in. And record the event with your cell-cam.

Comment by Venancio Tan
Entered on:

Hating the Government like you do is a form of "mental illness" according to the National Institute of Health -- this I want to remind you. Lambasting the Government for all the troubles you have has nothing to do with Ron Paul's unacceptable understanding of "freedom".

You can say whatever you want but you cannot deny that Ron Paul had been telling rural folks that it was their "freedom" to drink unpasteurized raw milk -- never mind if they catch a disease and spread an epidemic that kill people, especially the ignorant farmers mostly in the bayou! For as long as it is "freedom" to do whatever anybody wants to do, it is okay to Ron Paul -- that includes the freedom of terrorists to kill, and their liberty to destroy us. To him and his followers from the "lunatic fringe" the Government has no freedom to kill terrorists ... only the terrorists have the liberty to kill and destroy is us which to a terribly distorted mind, is allegedly protected by the Constitution! Ron Paul believes -- and you also believed -- he is a "Constitutionalist" after "delivering more than 400 babies" according to JV. I am a "Constitutionalist", he said  ... bah[!], you tell that to the Marines! That's how stupid is your understanding of what freedom means! That's why your "hero" will never be -- can never become -- President of the United States -- not a chance, even if the crow will turn white! 

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Osama bin Laden was a terrorist. He was a bad guy. But his part in 9/11 was little, near nothing. And in the part he played, he was promised protection by the U.S. Government. Instead, Government leaders and agents in control of the 9/11 disaster, reneged on their promise to protect bin Laden, and, instead, used him for the scapegoat, and tried to kill him.

Make a deal with Satan? You can't do it. He'll turn around and break you, because he is sneaky enough to wind up holding all the cards. Bin Laden found this out when he made a deal with the U.S. Government to, at least, allow them to use his name in the 9/11 disaster.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Your sly, tricky twisting of the freedom to speak, into ideas of hatred of government, are being seen through by most Freedom's Phoenix readers. Twisting the idea to be free as an idea to let terrorists have free reign, only serves to show that you support terrorism because you do not want to get rid of the terrorists right in Government, itself... terrorism that is evident by the fact that Government is the one who is taking away the freedom of Americans in the name of anti-terrorism.

And just to show you that you are against American ideals of freedom, your "disease in epidemic proportion that kill people" is entirely misleading. To see that it is misleading, all one need do is realize that the same chlorine dioxide that is being used to purify drinking water in cities around America, is being used to cure diseases in other parts of the world.

The same Chlorine dioxide in slighter greater ppm strengths is killing off virtually ALL the diseases that plague Americans. But it isn't doing it here in America. It is being used in South America and Africa for this. Why not in America? Because the two-faced American, terrorist-promoting Government won't let it be used here - if they can at all help it, that is. They would lose too much money if Americans were disease free. Search the Internet and YouTube for "chlorine dioxide" and "Jim Humble."

So you see? Rather than free people, you would join with the slave-making American government, right along with a bunch of other ignorant Americans, to keep the people of America and the world in bondage. Who is paying you the big bucks to do this, anyway?

Comment by Ana Panot
Entered on:

Osam bin Laden "influenced" the building of the present national security infrastructure in America when he launched the 911 attacks as the "fault" of the American people.  When Ron Paul blamed the American people for the 911 attacks and declared publicly that it was not the fault of Al Qaeda terrorists but of the U.S. Government for meddling in the affairs of the Middle East, why shouldn't he be nominated for the 2012 awards? You should be proud how he changed the world in his own way, shouldn't you? He is not an Islamic terrorist like bin Laden  -- but Ron Paul's oddity in this regard makes bin Laden's terrorism pale in comparison because he is a tax-paid American politician in Congress against America!

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

Whatever you say, or however you hated, attack or blame the Government, the freedom to drink raw milk that Ron Paul advocated and spread a disease in epidemic proportion that kill people, is NOT the Freedom of the American people that you have in mind. Ron Paul's love of Freedom of every person in America and elsewhere that you praised to high heavens which includes the freedom of terrorists to kill and liberty to destroy, is NOT shared by the American people, except yourself and your kind.  Just to cite a few of so many examples why what you are saying is no-no, no-go because whatever you say after that, is sooooo worthless it becomes just a nuisance.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Americans definitely SHOULD NOT be free. Why not? Because they are too stupid to use their freedom in ways that will benefit them and the other peoples of the world.

What is needed is Mafia style protectionism. But Mafia protectionism is too small. So, make the whole U.S. Government into a big protectionism racket.

Force those stupid Americans to pay for their own protection. Force them to pay the smart people in Government for their protection. Force them to pay for Government expansion to protect the whole world from its own stupidity.

Since wee the smart people, do not really know all the things needed to be done to protect people, we must experiment a little. If a few people lose their homes, die of cancer, heart disease and other diseases, or die in supposedly useless wars, while we are experimenting, it will be good for the vast majority. It will protect the vast majority. We are the benefactors.

So, down with freedom. Up with tyranny. It will be so good for us all in the long run. Especially if we the Big Government people make lots of money in the process.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Well, actually, JV, it was Ernie and a few of his friends who convinced Ron Paul that he should run for President. They asked for a deal from RP. Would RP agree to run if they could show him that there was support for Constitutionality out there in America? RP agreed to the deal.

Ernie followed through, and showed that people are fed up with things the way they are, that people want to get back to a Constitutional Government, that the vast majority of those who don't want Constitutionality, really don't understand what is going on. And this got Congressman Paul all excited. When he realized that there would be substantial support for Constitutionality in America, he willingly fulfilled his part of the bargain and ran on a Constitutionality-for-America platform. And so he is running today.

Disgusted with Ron Paul running for President? Disgusted with Ron Paul using his freedom to so run? Disgusted with all the people who are freely supporting Ron Paul? Sounds more like your friend is disgusted with any views on freedom that is not the same as his.

Don't the Freedom's Phoenix readers just love it? Ron Paul wants to get back to truth in Government, and freedom for all. And the big media guy, JV, and his friend with the PhD, both want to do away with freedom. But, it's kinda typical, isn't it?

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

A university scholar anti-terrorist FRIEND of mine who is so disgusted -- that Ron Paul, his followers and supporters from the "lunatic fringe" are still holding his announcement to drop from the race -- as Powell Gammill is so disgusted, raw and brainless in his anger and attack of the Government [artless or lack of editorial sophistication] -- had nominated Ron Paul, Charles Manson, Larken Rose, Bill Ayers, Jared Loughner and posthumously Timothy McVeigh and the Unabamber [in that order] as runners-ups for the 2012 Times "most influential" Awards.

I disagreed with my Ph.D. friend in the academe. I nominated ONLY Ron Paul as the year’s winner because I told him that Ron Paul is the "most influential" of them all! He even "influenced" Ernie not only to believe him and his Generation Next but also to "support" him all the way down to his defeat! Whoever does that to the publisher of must be truly a great man! I couldn't even convince Ernie that I am his friend wanting to help him run this website as exclusively popular as possible [not "notoriously" as it is editorially pushed to the revolutionary edge most of the time]. My published works had "influenced them" to give me several excellence awards, but I must tell you not the hard-to-convince Ernie.

By the way, my friend counter-disagreed with me vigorously. I cut off his name [I imagined it was his neck] from my e-mail address list.



Comment by Ernest Hancock
Entered on:

Of I submited a "Yes". But I'm not super excited about lending credibility to anything TIME has to say.

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: