Thanks to Mr. Ruton for taking charge and writing this letter to Gov. Ritter. 4 months ago I began my quest to make sure that I was listed as a mail-in balloter. I have yet to receive a confirmation from any phone call I've made or email that I have sent. The only way I have knowledge it is so, because I received my ballot. How shameful can El Paso get? Disgruntled, and volunteering my time to keep on livin in the belly of the beast...
One good reason to vote for Doug Lamborn is he would not talk to the far left wing Independent.Crank and Rayburn sold their values by going to the Independent's office.Remember the Independent has not even came out in support of the Second Amendment.
You state that Ron Paul doesn't have a chance to win. Colorado is a Republican state. True, most are fed up with the Republican party for the past presidential performance. BUT let's look at facts, the reason we are in so much trouble around the world is because our "Republican" president has tried to "spread democracy". Where have I heard it said, "A house divided can not stand"? We need to get back to the Constitution. Aritcle IV section 4, clearly states "The United States SHALL guarantee to every state in this union a REPUBLICAN form of government, and SHALL protect each of them against invasion;...against domestic violence."
WE, as a quasi-free people need to uphold the documents that made this nation great. WE THE PEOPLE need to take back what the founding fathers gave their lives for. WE THE PEOPLE need to stand up and protect the rights and freedoms of ALL people in this great nation. WE THE PEOPLE need to act for someone else before it happens to our four and no more circles. WE THE PEOPLE need to come to gether as the Patriots of history past and defend, protect and once again establish our basis rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, to ourselves and our posterity.
The best article that I have read in the Independent thus far this year. As always, straightforward with no sugar coating. Even if Presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul does not win, he will always be a symbol of hope and that America once had the chance to swim out of the revolting policies of debt and death of this current administration.
I am also very impressed with Obama, but his inexperience is GLARING. Give him 8 years as a VP and I think he could then truly transform this country. Hillary's knowledge, know-how and overall experience is crucial right now. And enough of the baggage, smaggage argument. She can and will be the most effective of any candidate running right now. With her in and both houses controlled by Democrats, change will come and it will happen quickly (in political time at least). Thus, Clinton will get my support on Feb 5, and I hope Obama will be her VP.
Those of us who 'get' Ron Paul really 'get it'. He's the only candidate who's an 'outsider' -- all the rest are way too heavily vested in the status quo. If you care about our constitutional form of government and want to keep it, there's only one choice -- Ron Paul.
Obama is a breath of fresh air. I wish the country was ready. I believe Ron Paul can still influence the election. Great article and I know because I have been to the worst sites on the internet (and sadly most of them are big ones; ABC, BBC, NBC, CBS, (don't even get me started on FOX)).
Congressman Paul, with sound conservative ideas, has been ignored by the media. The last debate, moderated by Anderson Cooper, came as a great shock to me. I counted on Mr. Cooper to be the one man to treat all the presidential candidates with equal respect. How disappointing his behavior was to all of us who admired him.
Isn't it odd that no matter how hard they try, the media and the party can not silence the message of Congressman Paul? Could it be because the truth rings out in his answers to questions and in his speeches? Could it be because his record, unlike all the other candidates, shows clearly that he is for upholding the Constitution? Could it be because he believes in a sovereign nation? Could it be because he takes the oath of office seriously? Whatever the answer, you can't stop the message.
I would like to thank the Colorado Springs Independent for being the exception to the rule and giving Congressman Paul the respect he is due. It is wonderful that for once his words are not distorted to discredit him. Thank You.
Are you really anti-war? If you are then the only candidate that represents you is Ron Paul. Hillary Clinton believed George Bush and his lies and helped kill over 3900 American troops. Barack Obama says he's been against this war from the beginning but for some reason he's voted to fund it though. While Republican Congressman Ron Paul voted against the authorization and has never voted to fund this war. So who's really anti-war?
To William "Bill" Walker: in the recent CNN Republican debate, CNN anchor Anderson Cooper showed himself to be a complete jerk, and Ron Paul showed himself to be both a man of splendid character and knowledge of the issues. So if those two men are representative, I'll take someone with two first names over two last names any day. And I hope he names Walter Williams, another man with two first names, as his VP. As for all the other candidates of both parties, well, if one wants to take after a dog turning back to its vomit, choose anyone of them; it makes no difference. They are all the same: warmed-over empty promises of "change" that amount to nothing. We might as well have four more years of Bush-Cheney as have any of the non-Paul candidates.
No guy with two first names is gonna win anything- He reminds me of Pat Paulson- WBW
RON PAUL IS GOING TO BE NEXT PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES// VOTE RON PAUL
Don't count Ron Paul out yet. According to the AOL poll numbers, Dr.No has dominated the western states. If Guiliani's miscalculation in Florida (as well as everyone else's subsequent miscalculations) has only shown us that this is a very volatile election cycle, and as such will not go the way anyone has yet predicted.
You have been misled by the comments on the GAGzette blog, AManWhoSees. We have always refuted the charge that there was any misrepresentation of the our group on the parade form. The registration form was filled out precisely like the year before. O'Donnell testified in court, he had no problem with the message of peace (which is NOT an antiwar protest in any town but this one)
The registration was sent as an invitation, and we did not go and ask to be part of th parade, but decided to participate again, since it had been a lot of fun for the kids in 2006, and well received by everyone. It's just a peace symbol.
Want to be a man who sees more? Watch this video of 4 of the 7 speaking at the press conference:
One factor the editorial doesn't mention is that the according to reports that the protesters have not contested, the protesters marched under false pretenses; their group was entered in the parade not as anti-war protesters but under the auspices of the business/organization of one of their members. While this story does raise some valid issues, I think the protesters' case would have a lot more validity if they hadn't deceived parade organizers.
In another recent Sealover article, I noticed that there seemed to be a preference for selecting inaccurate, misleading, controversial and/or inflammatory sound bites from interviews rather than do simple fact checking, or even provide the facts to enable the reader to understand the full picture. I'm not a journalist but, even with limited space allocation and deadline pressures, doesn't that fall short of the professional standards of journalism, not to mention simple honesty? I wonder whether this is a possible problem with Sealover's training or whether he is being undercut by Gazette editors. If the latter, it's got to be frustrating and embarrassing for him. If it's being done consciously and with editorial support, it's a shame.
All content © Copyright 2017, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation