Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Ron Paul in 2012


CitizenX

Recommended Posts

Dr. Ron Paul is America's only hope, maybe the world's. It's to bad he's Libertarian Right instead of left. Either way he seem better than anyone else I see down there.

One of the greatest speeches I've ever seen. A politician with common sense...Amazing.

On freedom

Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons.

Security and Liberty, April 23, 2007

On wars and interventions

The tired assertion that America "supports democracy" in the Middle East is increasingly transparent. It was false 50 years ago, when we supported and funded the hated Shah of Iran to prevent nationalization of Iranian oil, and it’s false today when we back an unelected military dictator in Pakistan - just to name two examples. If honest democratic elections were held throughout the Middle East tomorrow, many countries would elect religious fundamentalist leaders hostile to the United States. Cliché or not, the Arab Street really doesn’t like America, so we should stop the charade about democracy and start pursuing a coherent foreign policy that serves America’s long-term interests.

Hypocrisy in the Middle East, February 26, 2007

On economics

Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven’t had capitalism. A system of capitalism presumes sound money, not fiat money manipulated by a central bank. Capitalism cherishes voluntary contracts and interest rates that are determined by savings, not credit creation by a central bank. It’s not capitalism when the system is plagued with incomprehensible rules regarding mergers, acquisitions, and stock sales, along with wage controls, price controls, protectionism, corporate subsidies, international management of trade, complex and punishing corporate taxes, privileged government contracts to the military-industrial complex, and a foreign policy controlled by corporate interests and overseas investments. Add to this centralized federal mismanagement of farming, education, medicine, insurance, banking and welfare. This is not capitalism!

Has Capitalism Failed?

Quotes about Ron Paul

I strongly support Ron Paul, we very badly need to have more Representatives in the House who understand in a principled way the importance of property rights and religious freedom. - Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize economist

This courageous and quiet Congressman has made a worldwide name for himself as the defender of liberty in this country… a persistent fighter for the reduction of the power of bureaucrats everywhere… and one politician who cannot be bought by special interests.- Maxwell Newton, New York Post

Lobbyists don’t even bother going to his office. If their scheme doesn’t fall among the federal government’s enumerated powers under the Constitution, they know perfectly well that there is no chance Ron Paul will support it.- Thomas Woods, March 26, 200

There are 535 people on Capitol Hill whose job it is to write the laws that govern all of us, and he is one of them. There are 535 people on Capitol Hill whose job it is to preserve the constitution, and he is one of them. There are 535 people whose job it is to preserve our liberties, and he is one of them. But in his heart, and in his head, in his character, and in his intellect, in what he has done, and in what he will become, the Thomas Jefferson of our day, Ron Paul, is one of us.- Andrew Napolitano, Future of Freedom Foundation, June 3, 2007

What the founders knew is that you can get any decent person in there, you give them unchecked power, and they become a monster. And that's why I'm just as scared if Hillary has these powers to imprison Matt Drudge, as Giuliani have these powers... Ron Paul has always talked about these issues, and it's amazing to see, he's on the other side, but I have a lot of respect for what he's saying. And he has supporters really from both parties who are passionate about him because he's saying things like, we don't need an empire, let's just give up our oppressing nations all over the world and just have a republic.- Naomi Wolf, November 7, 2007

I'll worry about Ron Paul if he gets to the general election.- Barack Obama, November 8, 2007

He's fantastic... This guy - he's a Republican - and he says listen, when I become president, I'm taking us out of Iraq, I'm taking us out of everywhere in the world, because what good has it done us being in these fucking Middle Eastern countries? Because they hate us, I'm taking us out of all these wars, and we're done. And he goes, I'm not an isolationist, I'm not afraid to use the military where it's needed. But to sit in these extended fucking wars, draining the economy - and if we stay or we leave, the same goddamn thing happens: nothing! So let's leave. And people love this guy when he talks, he makes sense.

- Howard Stern, January 7, 2008

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 661
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Things that are absolutely amazing about the video in the OP:

- those words were spoken by an elected US politician!...on the floor of House of Representatives!

- the words were spoken...by a Republican!

- this Republican is a major candidate for the 2012 US presidential election (WHAT?!?!)

- he is from Texas (though was not born/raised in Texas IIRC, so not a full-blooded cowboy)

The fact that somebody like Ron Paul actually has some kind of reasonable chance of becoming the Republican nominee in 2012 provides me with some hope for humanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

I remember when Obama was the hope of so many Canadians, but I doubt that Paul "has some kind of reasonable chance of becoming the Republican nominee in 2012." In fact, I'd bet his chances are zilch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when Obama was the hope of so many Canadians, but I doubt that Paul "has some kind of reasonable chance of becoming the Republican nominee in 2012." In fact, I'd bet his chances are zilch.

You are right, he does not stand a chance of getting elected to POTUS, because the game is rigged. You are going to be getting Rick Perry instead. And with Rick Perry, the downward slide will continue.

Ron Paul is the only person saying the same things now, he said 30-40 years ago. You won't get that with the rest of the GOP line up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

You are right, he does not stand a chance of getting elected to POTUS, because the game is rigged. You are going to be getting Rick Perry instead. And with Rick Perry, the downward slide will continue.

He doesn't stand a chance of getting elected POTUS because he doesn't have enough support.

Ron Paul is the only person saying the same things now, he said 30-40 years ago. You won't get that with the rest of the GOP line up.

Could be because things have changed a lot in the past 30-40 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

Hope for humanity, along with the desire to eliminate every social program, to allow free reign to all corporate interests, and to eliminate the federal reserve.

Be careful what you wish for.

Americans are the ones who would be affected by it - and most Americans aren't wishing for it. Not by a long shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Americans are the ones who would be affected by it - and most Americans aren't wishing for it. Not by a long shot.

I concur. We're just watching from the bleachers and eating popcorn, as we do.

In any case, you're right ... he's not a serious threat.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-pn-quinnipiac-poll-perry-president-20110831,0,1130219.story

Latest poll has top candidates holding 42% of the vote, RP at single digits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Americans are the ones who would be affected by it - and most Americans aren't wishing for it. Not by a long shot.

You really think Americans would be the only ones affected by such things? History, including a look at US and global economics during the last month and a half, prove the opposite.

Paul does a have a chance at POTUS, albeit a very slim one given the powers that are stacked against him as others have alluded to. The fact that he's even in the conversation and on the debating stage with the rest of them is a miracle in itself.

And yes Michael Hardner, most of Paul's domestic policies are ludicrous.

Edited by Moonlight Graham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

You really think Americans would be the only ones affected by such things? History, including a look at US and global economics during the last month and a half, prove the opposite.

Well gee, if "most of his domestic policies are ludicrous," just who do you think would be affected by that? As for the effects the rest of the world are feeling, look to your own government, your own leaders, and the decisions that they made that resulted in America's leader affecting you all.

Paul does a have a chance at POTUS, albeit a very slim one given the powers that are stacked against him as others have alluded to. The fact that he's even in the conversation is a miracle in itself.

Unless you think a snowball has a chance in hell, he doesn't have a chance. And it's not because of "the powers that are stacked against him" - it's because "most of Paul's domestic policies are ludicrous." So why, in God's name, would the majority of Americans vote for him?? They wouldn't. And THAT'S the reason he doesn't have a chance.

And yes Michael Hardner, most of Paul's domestic policies are ludicrous.

Again, that's the reason he doesn't stand a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a few of his ideas are ludicrous.

Downsizing government is not ludicrous.

Getting rid of the Federal Reserve, not ludicrous.

Giving power back to the individual states, not ludicrous.

Giving power back to the people in freedom of choice on how they want to live, again, not ludicrous. (don't forget, liberty and freedom are two different things).

He does not believe in gay marriage and is opposed to it (on a personal level) but advocates that as long as people are not pushing their lifestyles on each other, then it can be live and let live. Does that sound ludicrous?

The only thing ludicrous is that people are offered a genuine alternative to the current long running status quo, but will be forced to continue with the status quo.

It's already been proven that he was sidelined at the start, and once people found out about that, all of a sudden the media is turning to lend some support for Paul. Also important to note, a guy like Perry is now saying the same thing of dumping the Fed, but this is the guy a few months ago said he would never run for POTUS, and now he is. So already he is a flip flopper.

But don't worry, the next election is already decided, and the machines will count votes for Perry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eliminate government support of healthcare.

Why pay your taxes to the government who then pays the health care and take a little off the top for administration fees? Americans don't want socialistic health care, but the moment you try to take away some of the health care that is socialistic in some way (Medicare medicade) people complain? Makes no sense.

Eliminate environmental regulations.

Granted some of his points are ludicrus, but if the good points outweigh the ludicrous ....

Withdraw from the UN, NATO and NAFTA.

Actually those would benefit the US in a huge way. Because let's talk about Libya here, if it was not for the UN/NATO, the US would not be involved in Libya. Saving money, lives and respect.

Ban abortion.

He is a doctor, with an oath to save and respect life. That fits into being a doctor. I don't agree with it, but this is another part of his approach where he will let the individual states decide these matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
Granted some of his points are ludicrus, but if the good points outweigh the ludicrous ....

No. Even assuming that what you think are "good points" are indeed good, good points don't "outweigh" ludicrous. Ludicrous is still ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. Even assuming that what you think are "good points" are indeed good, good points don't "outweigh" ludicrous. Ludicrous is still ludicrous.

Well, even when you are shopping for something, you do take that into account. You weight both and compare. If the good is more than the bad, you go for it.

Sure I guess it's not ludicrous to be at perpetual war, all while jobs getting offshored all in time for a housing market/derivatives crash, and a financial crisis that had global implications. Sure that is all fine and dandy.

It's like one small pat on the back is ludicrous compared to getting kicked in the balls every single day for the last 11 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

Well, even when you are shopping for something, you do take that into account. You weight both and compare. If the good is more than the bad, you go for it.

Nope. If there's anything at all "ludicrous" about a product, I don't buy it.

Sure I guess it's not ludicrous to be at perpetual war, all while jobs getting offshored all in time for a housing market/derivatives crash, and a financial crisis that had global implications. Sure that is all fine and dandy.

As I've said repeatedly, look to your own government for the "global implications" you all are feeling. That's based on decisions your government made. Our government isn't responsible for your well-being - any more than your government is responsible for ours. We vote on what's best for us, same as you do, and Americans are going to consider "ludicrous domestic policies" - ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. If there's anything at all "ludicrous" about a product, I don't buy it.

And yet people bought Bush/Cheney TWICE .. and then Obama/Biden.

As I've said repeatedly, look to your own government for the "global implications" you all are feeling. Our government isn't responsible for your well-being - any more than your government is responsible for ours. We vote on what's best for us, same as you do, and Americans are going to consider "ludicrous domestic policies" - ludicrous.

Canada seems to be doing much better than most. Even a couple banks in Canada also got bail out money from the US. That's ludicrous! And if you really voted on what is best for you and your country, you would be voting Paul. Don't worry, vote for who you want, Perry is your next POTUS.

But in terms of Canada, our leaders are no better. They all play into the corporations plans. Plain and simple.

Another thing Paul is advocating which I would guess seems ludicrous to you... personal responsibility. Own your mistakes and learn from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

And yet people bought Bush/Cheney TWICE .. and then Obama/Biden.

Need I remind you? People "bought" Bush once .. more people "bought" Gore the first time around, and the reason they "bought" Bush the second time around was because of the circumstances that happened during the first term - which had nothing to do with him.

As for "buying" Obama - do I have to remind you that he was the darling of the world? The hope and faith of the world? Yes, yes. I know that YOU didn't like him, but it's not all about you - and quite frankly, there was nothing "ludicrous" about his campaign/platform.

But let's take another look at your "more good points" outweighs "ludicrous" - you're buying a house, and you love everything about it. There's no other house that you even come close to loving as much as you love this house. Everything about it is perfect. But the location is right next to a dump site. Not only is it a smelly eye-sore, but dump trucks are noisily going in an out all day long. Would you buy that house - or would the ludicrous location over power all the good points? I know what I would do.

Canada seems to be doing much better than most. Even a couple banks in Canada also got bail out money from the US. That's ludicrous! And if you really voted on what is best for you and your country, you would be voting Paul. Don't worry, vote for who you want, Perry is your next POTUS.

How would you know what is best for me? For my country? You want Americans telling you what's best for Canada? Or do you think Canadians might know more about that than we do? And yes, Canada is doing well now, but in that 11 year time span you speak of, I went to Canada - and got $1.68 CND for $1 US. Things weren't always as good as they are now. And who knows what will be in another 11 years?

But in terms of Canada, our leaders are no better. They all play into the corporations plans. Plain and simple.

Of course they're not. And they're responsible for any "fall back" that your country feels.

Another thing Paul is advocating which I would guess seems ludicrous to you... personal responsibility. Own your mistakes and learn from them.

Why would you "guess" that would seem ludicrous to me? <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron Paul is pretty awesome all around, best part is he speaks his mind. One area where I do not agree with him is on environmental issues, I don't like things like nuclear power plants.

Most of the stuff he says is good though. When he says he is against gay marriage it is because he doesn't think the government should have a role in marriage. He doesn't think you should need to get a marriage licence issued by the government and that marriage should be left up to the church which clearly states that marriage is between a man and a women.

As for abortion, in many cases the fetus does have rights, as a physician he was legally responsible for the life of the fetus...if you are in a car accident and you kill someones unborn baby then you will be charged, the fetus does have rights and he does not like it that people can choose when and when not the fetus has rights. That being said I still don't agree with him on this issue. To me it isn't even a big issue.

As for you liberals who keep saying that him taking away the welfare programs would doom the country then you don't understand economics. These welfare programs which are suppose to stop people from falling threw the cracks only make the cracks bigger and allow more people to fall threw. they create a dependency on government and they are often paid with using debt which devalues the currency which ends up hurting everyone.

And Ron Paul isn't for big corporations, he is against the corporatism that is occurring in the states, he understands that their fiat currency is the enabler to having these massive corporations which have monopolies in almost every sector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for you liberals who keep saying that him taking away the welfare programs would doom the country then you don't understand economics. These welfare programs which are suppose to stop people from falling threw the cracks only make the cracks bigger and allow more people to fall threw. they create a dependency on government and they are often paid with using debt which devalues the currency which ends up hurting everyone.

You're one step away from being a true believer then. I'm thinking of the Von Mises types who would cut payments to destitute seniors and proudly so, saying that they're helping them.

These programs were created to help poorer people who were taken advantage of, who worked their whole lives on the lowest rung of society. Such ideas turn back the clock to the days of yesteryear when power was concentrated at the very top of society. Why did we leave that time if it was so great ? Why did we create social programs to balance out things for those who play the game and lose ?

Did the poor ever improve their lot at that time ? No, they were miserable and going back to 18th century forms of government will ensure that power consolidates exactly as it did in those days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...How would you know what is best for me? For my country? You want Americans telling you what's best for Canada? Or do you think Canadians might know more about that than we do? And yes, Canada is doing well now, but in that 11 year time span you speak of, I went to Canada - and got $1.68 CND for $1 US. Things weren't always as good as they are now. And who knows what will be in another 11 years?

So true.....not so long ago Canada was on its fiscal ass and its debt rating was downgraded. I still remember the "Canadian Peso", and that was an insult to Mexico! But MH has it about right...they sit in the peanut gallery and beak off about US elections like clockwork while most Americans don't know and don't care who the hell gets "elected" Prime Minister in Canada.

Telling Americans who to vote for would never be tolerated in return. Ron Paul is going nowhere fast, but it's good entertainment for the wannabes who feel so impotent about their own government, hoping and praying that America's choices can save them from themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...