This made me a chuckle a little

Originally posted by Devil King
Just an open question, not really on topic, I suppose.

How is Ron Paul being portrayed in the media in other countries? How are his ideas and policy being viewed? How much of it lines up with the current political heavy-weights in your countries, and what you guys see as the political ideals of those who apparently "vote" these guys into power??

I can honestly say that I have not met one person who knew of Ron Paul in Australia, without me having mentioned prior. Even those who I know who have been following Decision '08 to some degree don't even know who I talking about. Heck, when I was in America this January, people didn't know who I was referring to. The media coverage in general of Decision '08 I feel in Australia is somewhat skewed. There seems to be the perception that the Democratic candidates (both Clinton and Obama are well-known. Well, at least their names) are far above any Republican candidate (for some reason, the likes of McCain, Huckabee, etc, are less known) that it's practically a no-brainer who is going to win. When, in reality, Head-to-head polls show a much closer race otherwise.

The limited free to air coverage doesn't consist of much, because there has been somewhat more concerning news as we've had a change in government and other stressing issues. However, Australia is the Labour party (the left wing party in Australia) controlling all levels of government and therefore lean towards favoring the Democratic candidates and the majority (by how much I'm not certain) more or less favor those beliefs.

Originally posted by Kram3r
To list a few:

* Ron Paul has a nonintervention foreign policy
* Ron Paul objected to and voted against the Iraq War Resolution
* Ron Paul is a proponent of free trade and rejects isolationism
* Ron Paul believes the size of federal government must be decreased substantially
* Ron Paul supports tax cuts and lower spending

More info: http://www.ronpaul2008.com

No. The 2nd 2 are things that everyone in their right mind shold vote for, but no one in their right mind should actually expect.

Originally posted by King Kandy
The first three are things many other candidates support, and the second two are things that no one in their right mind should vote for.

Yeah, I agree with you. America needs more government. The Patriot Act II wasn't enough.

Funny, I seem to recall that America had 213 years of strong central government before that act got passed...

Originally posted by King Kandy
Funny, I seem to recall that America had 213 years of strong central government before that act got passed...

The government has become MUCH Bulkier in these past 8 years than during the rest of it's course.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Funny, I seem to recall that America had 213 years of strong central government before that act got passed...

America did not have 200 years of strong central government. It had 100 years of infighting over a strong central government at the bginning, which eventually became the federal government.

Originally posted by Kram3r
The government has become [B]MUCH Bulkier in these past 8 years than during the rest of it's course. [/B]

What?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What?

What's there not to get? The government has grown increasingly (and frighteningly) during in tenure of the Bush administration.

Originally posted by Kram3r
What's there not to get? The government has grown increasingly (and frighteningly) during in tenure of the Bush administration.

Increasingly powerful? In comparison and more than in its 200+ year history?

I suspect that if it had grown "frighteningly", those growths would not be a talking point in the current election.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Increasingly powerful? In comparison and more than in its 200+ year history?

Probably not all together but through the test of each administration and at the rate in which it's proceeding, I definitely think it has vastly increased it has control. With legislation like the Patriot Act and the REAL ID Act being enforced, it's just scary.

Originally posted by Devil King
Just an open question, not really on topic, I suppose.

How is Ron Paul being portrayed in the media in other countries? How are his ideas and policy being viewed? How much of it lines up with the current political heavy-weights in your countries, and what you guys see as the political ideals of those who apparently "vote" these guys into power??

Originally posted by Devil King
I suspect that if it had grown "frighteningly", those growths would not be a talking point in the current election.

It is kinda frightening.

Originally posted by Kram3r
Probably not all together but through the test of each administration and at the rate in which it's proceeding, I definitely think it has vastly increased it has control. With legislation like the Patriot Act and the REAL ID Act being enforced, it's just scary.

The Alien and Sedition acts fell through in the end. Still their existence should have prevented the Patriot Act from being created.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, your debt increased by something like 4 trillion ( 4 000 000 000 000 ) in the last ten years.

It is kinda frightening.

Maddening that it isn't even an issue in the elections, huh?

Originally posted by Kram3r
What's there not to get? The government has grown increasingly (and frighteningly) during in tenure of the Bush administration.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Wait, so doesn't that mean it's the Bush administrations fault? Not the federal system itself, that system has withstood 200+ years of existence and still been in good shape.

Not necessarily. The US government has obviously grown in strength over it's life-span since it's creation and therefore part of the blame can be, in turn, placed there. I don't think it's true, nor fair, to blame all of it on the Bush administration. However, the Bush administration has done a lot (more so than previous administrations), in strengthening the powers of federal government. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with your second statement as the lifespan of government doesn't dictate whether or not a government is good and whether or not the US government is "in good shape" is subjective and highly debatable.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Ron Paul isn't really mentioned in any way by the media in Germany. Though the whole coverage of the primaries is not very extensive. Only interested people really know something about the primaries. And then mostly about Obama and Clinton. Maybe McCain. Not that they actually really know what the people stand for though, it's more like a "who seems sympathetic" thing. Obviously primaries in the US aren't and shouldn't really be a hot topic in our media.

so it's not too far off from how it is here in the states. (how is a democrat going to be taken seriousy if he's a male or white, in other words.)

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, your debt increased by something like 4 trillion ( 4 000 000 000 000 ) in the last ten years.

It is kinda frightening.

That's not what i mean. If it had grown "frighteningly", then it would not be up for debate. As in, my statement reflects the conspiracy aspect of big government.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Wait, so doesn't that mean it's the Bush administrations fault? Not the federal system itself, that system has withstood 200+ years of existence and still been in good shape.

the current central government system is not 200+ years old.