Ron Paul

[cottonzway]

What is it going to take for you fooled conservatives who follow the Neo-Conservative ideology of the Republican party to support Ron Paul? What is it going to take for you Liberals who are about to get a female Clinton in office who is a socialist if you don’t support Ron Paul? What part don’t you understand?

Is it the failed foreign policy or the every failing economic of the US? Do you still support both maybe? Why are intelligent people allowing hubris to effect their ability to think?

Even to the most insane Islamophobe who want to “Killem’ All” why can’t you understand we can’t afford this? Do you not realize we have to borrow money from China, Japan, and many other countries to continue this? Nation building and aggressive, unconstitutional, illegal invasion wars are NOT American no matter how much FOX “NEWS” lies to you otherwise. No matter how much mindless country music tells you otherwise. Have any of you who support this looked at our constitution, ever? Even if you think the constitution is a “damn piece of paper” like the national disgrace that acts as out leader would say we CAN NOT AFORD THIS. Do you understand that we already owe over $3 Trillion to China and Japan alone so far and that China is slowly dumping our dollar? Stop letting people falsely wrapped in an American flag talk logic to you on what we can afford and more importantly what our constitution SAYS we should do. It’s not a “damn piece of paper” to me but what this great country was BORN out of and we have NO DECLERATION OF WAR for Afghanistan and Iraq. If you are supporting these wars you are supporting illegal wars that are FAILURES and drying up money we desperately need.

The economy is in a dire situation. The dollar has been debased and every time the Fed cuts the rate some more it leads to inflation. More money printed by the Fed leads to hyper inflation. Why do you think M-3 is no longer public? Where is the “Checks and Balances” with M-3 not being public anymore? What is the dollar worth now? Compared to a Pound, Euro, or even a F’N Looney? What’s the sub-prime market look like? How about the Hedge Funds? How much money did the PPT (Plunge Protection Team) put back in the market a few months ago when Bear Stearns had a few of them blown out? What happened in 2006 when Amaranth blew out in Connecticut? What happens when 5, 10, 100 of these Hedge Funds blow out when it all falls? What does the BIS have to say about our derivatives markets? Who is the BIS? Well people assume the Federal Reserve in the be all of Central Banks, but guess who sets their policies? The Bank for International Settlements (www.bis.org) says we are over $500 TRILLION in debt (secured and unsecured) in debt as a country in the derivatives market. That means we are insolvent. We can’t pay that because such a number of money does not exist. Game over. Our dollar is on its deathbed and Americans stay ignorant to it. This fiat currency in its current situation no longer serves us. I think different variations like Ron Paul (who is a student of the Austrian School of Economics) need to be implemented before we go the route of the Soviet Union. I think a Gold Standard is a good start followed by something similar to a Bretten-Woods Agreement need to be put in place to stabilize our currency.

Stop fooling yourselves. Stop being good Republicans and good Democrats. Start supporting our country being a great power in the world known as a beacon of freedom to others. We have lost our way as a nation. What US hegemony is now is not what this country was built upon. Ron Paul puts forth concepts to return this country to the Republic it was when we had a booming economy and were a respected nation around the world. If you are honest with yourself neither of those are true under the direction we are in now. If you choose to not support Ron Paul you can expect Hilary Clinton as our next president. The conservative right is not going to give enough support toe a flip-flopping Mormon or a pro-abortion guy on his 3rd marriage. Another big-business Neo-Con type will now win. The left will win by default and Mrs. Clinton is a pure socialist and not even equipped to do the job. Is this what you want for our country? I don’t and people who are honest with themselves will support Dr. Ron Paul as our next president because he is the only person on either side that has the ideas that will lead us back into the nation we once were. Be honest with yourself above all else and support the best candidate. VOTE for Ron Paul!

www.ronpaul2008.com

 

[cottonzway]

I beat around the bush (no pun intended) about Ron Paul here and felt the need to put this out there to what I consider a lager majority of intelligent, open-minded people who frequent theses forums. I am far from a standard, conservative Republican. In fatc, I changed parties so I can vote for Dr. Paul in the upcoming primaries. I am not asking people to look at all of his views and fall in line with them. That is simply not reasonable. I am asking quality thinkers to be REASONABLE though. How can you support a chicken hawk Neo-Con like Guliani/Romney, a socialist like Clinton, or a pro-Iran/Pakistan attack man like Obama. Be real to yourselves. Stop being good Republicans and Democrats and START being good people instead. Ron Paul or bust.

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

I don’t and people who are honest with themselves will support Dr. Ron Paul as our next president because he is the only person on either side that has the ideas that will lead us back into the nation we once were. Be honest with yourself above all else and support the best candidate. VOTE for Ron Paul!

Dennis Kucinich is just as good of a candidate as Ron Paul. It should be Paul vs Kucinich in this race, Lincoln/Douglas style.

Too bad neither of them will win. Hillary is going to be the next president, man. No amount of raising 4.5 million dollars in a day is going to change that. It doesn't matter how popular Paul is. The powers that be will not allow him to become president, neither Kucinich. Period. Haven't you heard of Diebold? The elections don't matter, dude. They're staged. Don't you remember the last several elections in this country? All staged like a goddamned melodrama.

It's time to jump ship. I'm currently looking for a country to move to right now, somewhere that doesn't even participate in Western society. None of the big nations. Not China, Japan, USA, Canada, Mexico, UK, Germany. Nowhere in Austrialia.

I'm thinking...Queen Elizabeth Islands, maybe? Seems like a peaceful place. Noone ever hears about those islands. I'm willing to bet there's a great community up there, looking down at the rest of the world, just shaking their goddamned heads at how crazy the rest of us are.

 

[cottonzway]

I don’t and people who are honest with themselves will support Dr. Ron Paul as our next president because he is the only person on either side that has the ideas that will lead us back into the nation we once were. Be honest with yourself above all else and support the best candidate. VOTE for Ron Paul!

Dennis Kucinich is just as good of a candidate as Ron Paul. It should be Paul vs Kucinich in this race, Lincoln/Douglas style.

Too bad neither of them will win. Hillary is going to be the next president, man. No amount of raising 4.5 million dollars in a day is going to change that. It doesn't matter how popular Paul is. The powers that be will not allow him to become president, neither Kucinich. Period. Haven't you heard of Diebold? The elections don't matter, dude. They're staged. Don't you remember the last several elections in this country? All staged like a goddamned melodrama.

It's time to jump ship. I'm currently looking for a country to move to right now, somewhere that doesn't even participate in Western society. None of the big nations. Not China, Japan, USA, Canada, Mexico, UK, Germany. Nowhere in Austrialia.

I'm thinking...Queen Elizabeth Islands, maybe? Seems like a peaceful place. Noone ever hears about those islands. I'm willing to bet there's a great community up there, looking down at the rest of the world, just shaking their goddamned heads at how crazy the rest of us are.

I’m sorry man, but that is such a defeatist attitude. Not that I don’t understand it, but I personally will not give up the concept of the United States without a damn fight. I think violence is a way of the foolish and ignorant so I choose to fight the battle for the republic in the way of politics.

That doesn’t ensure victory though. That doesn’t mean losing is not an option. People who say losing is not an option are not thinking clearly. I’m not concerned with that though. I am more interested in putting forth and supporting ideas to save this country from the pending doom that lurks over it. The reality is “Rome” is crumbling and is about to fall. Not trying at this point is what is not the option.

I know who Diebold is. I also know who writes their software, SAIC (the same people developing all of the dangerous space weapons). If they steal the primaries or the presidency then let them do it right in front of the MAJORITY of American people. Let them expose themselves and answer to the American people right then and there. Everyone who has a little bit of understanding about politics knows who Dieblod is. They know with their help Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004. Make them steal it and show this government for what they are in front of all of us.

Dennis Kucinich has no chance. Mike Gravel has no chance. Props to both of them because they are both good men with the right intentions for this country. They are on the side of where the “power” is though. You are most likely right about Hilary Clinton. She most likely will be our next president. Why? Because the Neo-Conservative branch of the Republican party has dammed that party beyond repair. See what happened in 2006 to understand that in the House. Ron Paul is not a Neo-Con though. He is a Libertarian running on the Republican ticket. He can WIN that side because they are running warmongers who don’t even represent the ideas of the zealot right in the first place. I don’t support socialism and support an attack on Iran that will lead us into financial collapse and into a WW III situation with Russia/China and their Shanghai Cooperation Organization group that counters NATO.

I’m not going anywhere. I was born in this country and I will die, hopefully one day many years from now, in this country. I am realistic about what is going on and informed as well. Ron Paul may lose, in fact he may even be killed, but point is in principal I refuse to give up what this country stands for because my guy “may lose” the election. If he loses, we all lose and that alone is worth speaking out against. Push the rock and hopefully enough will join you to move it. If not you can respect yourself for trying.

 

[The Hawk]

The Hawk is voting Ron Paul.
I don't think blabbing on the Internet helps a whole lot because it's already flooded; but whatever do your thing. I think the little things like a bumper sticker are good.. Name recognition is easily the most important thing when it comes to elections.

Some people I know could care less about politics yet they have the arrogance/ignorance to stand in firm stance on what drug policy should be. I hate the drug war and it burns me up inside when I think about the prolonging and the short sighted brainwashed mindsets which allow it to continue. Mike Gravel, Kucinich, and Ron Paul all get props from me if just for their stance on the drug war. But Ron Paul is on a plain of his own above the rest IMO. Just like any other politicians Kucinich and Gravel want to "give" the people this or that, the same old way: more centralized power taking $ to give $. ..enough of that.. You are one man Mr. President, you are a leader and a beacon not the "Decider".

 

[DamnDirtyApe]

I like a lot of Paul's stances on domestic issues, but his foreign policy views seem a bit iffy to me.

How would Paul address the issue of Iran getting nukes? Iran with nuclear weaponry is bad news for us, Israel, and the world as a whole.

Also, I understand that he would leave Iraq asap, but what about the huge vacuum that Iran would fill? Yea it's an illegal war by warmongering facist America blah blah blah, but the fact remains that with Iraq evicerated and America back at home, Iran would be giddy with joy at the thought of moving in and becoming the major unopposed Arab power in the Middle East. At least Iraq under Saddam was Iran's counterpoint.

And what would he do with guys like Musharraf?

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

I like a lot of Paul's stances on domestic issues, but his foreign policy views seem a bit iffy to me.

How would Paul address the issue of Iran getting nukes? Iran with nuclear weaponry is bad news for us, Israel, and the world as a whole.

Also, I understand that he would leave Iraq asap, but what about the huge vacuum that Iran would fill? Yea it's an illegal war by warmongering facist America blah blah blah, but the fact remains that with Iraq evicerated and America back at home, Iran would be giddy with joy at the thought of moving in and becoming the major unopposed Arab power in the Middle East. At least Iraq under Saddam was Iran's counterpoint.

And what would he do with guys like Musharraf?

Three cheers for the headline quoter.

Iran isn't a threat to anyone, with or without nukes. I hate this kind of ignorant rambling. Iran isn't a threat to Israel. Israel could obliterate every square inch of Iran in about 25 minutes and sustain only minor injuries in the process.

You should pull your head away from CNN and other garbage media. Just because the TV says that Iran is a threat doesn't make it true.

 

[DamnDirtyApe]

I like a lot of Paul's stances on domestic issues, but his foreign policy views seem a bit iffy to me.

How would Paul address the issue of Iran getting nukes? Iran with nuclear weaponry is bad news for us, Israel, and the world as a whole.

Also, I understand that he would leave Iraq asap, but what about the huge vacuum that Iran would fill? Yea it's an illegal war by warmongering facist America blah blah blah, but the fact remains that with Iraq evicerated and America back at home, Iran would be giddy with joy at the thought of moving in and becoming the major unopposed Arab power in the Middle East. At least Iraq under Saddam was Iran's counterpoint.

And what would he do with guys like Musharraf?

Three cheers for the headline quoter.

Iran isn't a threat to anyone, with or without nukes. I hate this kind of ignorant rambling. Iran isn't a threat to Israel. Israel could obliterate every square inch of Iran in about 25 minutes and sustain only minor injuries in the process.

You should pull your head away from CNN and other garbage media. Just because the TV says that Iran is a threat doesn't make it true.

I hate the kind of ignorant rambling that implies a nuclear armed Iran is just peachy.

Are you actually saying that if Iran had nukes, those weapons could NEVER fall into the hands of people willing to use them!!!? Are you actually saying that a nuclear Iran would have no impact on world politics? Sorry, but I think your stance is "ignorant" Have you ever heard of Pakistan? Are you remotely aware of how delicate international diplomacy has become with them becuase of the very fact that they have nukes and have radical elements within their government? Why do you think it's such a big deal right now that stability is maintained over there with the Musharraf/Bhutto crap going on.

And sure, Israel could wipe out Iran with it's own nukes. I'd prefer it if it never came to that. If YOU want to tell yourself that it's no big deal then then go right ahead, I see the situation quite differently. I guess we'll agree to disagree.


Oh yea, please enlighten me as to the super-duper authentic source of the "real" news that you use.

 

[Capnkumquat]

Ron Paul is the man. He may not have all the answers that the Damn Dirty Ape would like to hear about Pakistan, Iran, Iraq etc... but he has something better than definitive answers. Ron Paul has a guiding philosophy that our federal government has wiped its ass on the constitution and a return to strict constructionist reading of the constitution means we all benefit in the long run.

When Ron Paul's philosophy "we have a set of rules (the constitution) and I think we should follow the rules" is viewed as radical by Republicans and Dems alike...we have a serious problem in this country.

Personal freedom is far more important than squashing your enemies for fun and profit. Vote Ron Paul!!!

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

I hate the kind of ignorant rambling that implies a nuclear armed Iran is just peachy.

I didn't say it's a good thing. In fact, I think nukes in general are a bad idea and should be dismantled immidiately. Until we disarm our own weapons, however, we have no business bullying other countries into disarming. That's just a matter of fact, okay? It's like prosecuting a rapist and being one at the same time.

Are you actually saying that if Iran had nukes, those weapons could NEVER fall into the hands of people willing to use them!!!?

No. But then, can you say that the US's own weapons would never fall into the hands of those willing to use them? Or how about Russia? It "lost track" of lots of its nukes, but I don't hear you parroting bullshit war rhetoric about them.

Are you actually saying that a nuclear Iran would have no impact on world politics?

No. A nuclear Iran obviously would have a substantive effect on world politics. However, I do not believe that impacting geopolitics deserves a retaliatory strike by the US. Here's the real issue. Denying Iran nukes isn't about protecting the national security of the US or Israel. It's about denying Iran the right to a detterrent against US/Israeli unilateralism and bullying. Period. In other words, it's about empire. Read "Rebuilding America's Defenses," by PNAC, to understand the nature of our aggressive wars.

And sure, Israel could wipe out Iran with it's own nukes. I'd prefer it if it never came to that. If YOU want to tell yourself that it's no big deal then then go right ahead, I see the situation quite differently. I guess we'll agree to disagree.

Since Israel could wipe out Iran easily, Iran would never use WOMD against Israel because doing so would ensure its own annihilation. That's why a nuclear Iran doesn't threaten Israel. Iran also knows that aggression against Israel would warrant an attack from the US, which Iran doesn't want.

Also, the CIA and UN weapons inspectors are both saying that Iran doesn't even have the ability to make nukes for an estimated 10 years. Sicne Iran is a signiatory to the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty, it has the right to puruse nuclear energy. That's it, man. End of story.

Oh yea, please enlighten me as to the super-duper authentic source of the "real" news that you use.

I don't have a super-duper authentic source of news, so my brain has to substitute.

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

[I know who Diebold is. I also know who writes their software, SAIC (the same people developing all of the dangerous space weapons).

You know more than I do.

If they steal the primaries or the presidency then let them do it right in front of the MAJORITY of American people. Let them expose themselves and answer to the American people right then and there. Everyone who has a little bit of understanding about politics knows who Dieblod is. They know with their help Bush STOLE Ohio in 2004. Make them steal it and show this government for what they are in front of all of us.

Well, the problem I see with Diebold is the lack of a paper trail on some of the machines. Without any kind of data, they can steal the election and no one will be able to prosecute them due to lack of evidence.

"They stole the election, your honor!"

"Where is the data," says the judge.

"There isn't any. Their machines don't leave a paper trail."

"Then you have no proof. Case dismissed."

Earlier this year, during the Iowa straw poll, I think a group with ties to the Paul campaign sued Diebold and tried to get them banned from the straw poll. The judge decided that he had no right to regulate which company or technology the RNC could use. Then the diebold machines were used and Mitt Romney "won" the poll, just after the technicians arrived to fix some minor software problems.

It's so goddamned disgusting, the state of political discourse in this country. I want out. I don't want to participate in our political system anymore. It's nothing but bullshit.

Dennis Kucinich has no chance. Mike Gravel has no chance. Props to both of them because they are both good men with the right intentions for this country.

The same goes for Paul, I fear, but I hope you're right.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

The dilemma is, even though some politicians may sound good, once he's/she's in office, they don't do what they said. It's actually rare that I see, or hear one that even sounds good. I've heard sound bites of Paul, and didn't hate him. More than I can say for Clinton, his hoe, and Bush. Oh, and that Obamamama guy, gets on my fukin nerves. Sux, cause I wanted a black prez. Just to piss off the racist rednecks ya know? I was hoping for Oprah. A black woman prez. /sinister laugh..... No, I don't keep up with politics much. I use booze to kill my brain instead.

 

[schticknz]

The dilemma is, even though some politicians may sound good, once he's/she's in office, they don't do what they said. It's actually rare that I see, or hear one that even sounds good. I've heard sound bites of Paul, and didn't hate him. More than I can say for Clinton, his hoe, and Bush. Oh, and that Obamamama guy. No, I don't keep up with politics much. I use booze to kill my brain instead.

No politician is allowed to get anywhere near high political office in the US without being compromised in some way. Ron Paul is no exception. If the powers that be want him to be in the Oval Office, they will let him get in (since he'll be in their power, they will have a hold over him in some way).

If he somehow gets into power, then he's stuffed. Either he'll be killed ... if he decides to go off the reservation (see JFK, Lincoln ... Reagan was nearly taken out by the son of a friend of George Bush Sr) or they'll bring something out on him (a la Monica Lewinsky).

The President is merely a puppet, a talking head for the people behind the scenes ... whether they be Neo-cons (actually old style Trotsky-ists), and/or Zionists etc etc etc.

 

[DamnDirtyApe]

Or how about Russia? It "lost track" of lots of its nukes, but I don't hear you parroting bullshit war rhetoric about them.

I think you are projecting your own issues onto me a bit becuase I never said anything pro "war rhetoric" - I simply asked Cottonzway if Paul had an official stance on how to deal with Iran, and what he would do about the power void in Iraq if America left. If I had been prez, I would have gutted Afghanistan and left Iraq alone.

And yes, I AM concerned about the fact that Russia has lost track of its inventory. But at the current moment, Iraq and Iran are more pressing issues in my opinion.

Denying Iran nukes isn't about protecting the national security of the US or Israel.

Could not disagree more. If it was Greenland that was arming itself it wouldn't be an issue. But then again, Greenland is not a country living in a cultural stone age run by a lunatic and clergy that hates jews and other infidels, stones women for being raped and happens to be situated in the oil supply center of the world.

Sicne Iran is a signiatory to the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty, it has the right to puruse nuclear energy. That's it, man. End of story.

LOL. Yea Iran wants nuclear technology for "nuclear energy" riiiigggghhhhttt. And I'm Abraham Lincoln. Since when do countries abide by treaties anyway?

Whether or not Iran would OPENLY use nukes on Israel is open to debate/discussion, but the mere fact that they possess them would complicate matters and allow Iran to step up its own agression and emperial desires. Unlike you apparently, I'd prefer it if enemy nations like Iran remained non nuclear.

But back to Ron Paul, Cottonzway if you have any good links on how Paul would deal with foreign policy headaches like Iran, please PM them to me.

 

[BrandonD]

Could not disagree more. If it was Greenland that was arming itself it wouldn't be an issue. But then again, Greenland is not a country living in a cultural stone age run by a lunatic and clergy that hates jews and other infidels, stones women for being raped and happens to be situated in the oil supply center of the world.

Here is a rule of thumb which you can apply to all acts of the state: Regardless of whether it's drug laws, foreign policy, domestic restrictions, none of them exist to protect you or to serve your best interests.

If a portion of any act of the state appears to be in your best interests, that is only because a minimal portion of it must appear so in order to retain public support and justify the lie of its existence. Anyone who supports the state's actions is being tricked.

So whatever good disarming Iran might do for our most holy and benevolent country (which of course no one could say is run by a lunatic and the clergy), an invasion would in reality be done for financial and military interests. Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but in the view of the state you are a commodity and nothing more.

So do you still like the idea of our military barging into a foreign country and blasting away at its population?

 

[cottonzway]

My guess as to what Ron Paul would do in regards to Iran and their nuclear program? I think he and others who step aside of this fear mongering that is among us about Iran realize that Iran with a nuke is as dangerous as any country with a nuke. No more, no less. I mean, why not the fear mongering and outrage of Pakistan having nuclear arms? A country that WE helped give nukes to is in bed with Russia and China, an observer state member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization that were running war game exercises with Russia, China, India, Mongolia, and yes IRAN that the ignorant American thinks is our friend? The same country that is total chaos and under martial law right now. The same country that even if you believe the 9/11 myth funded the attacks where the head of their ISI wired 100 grand to the lead hijacker. What about the USSR during the Cold War that had 40,000 nuclear devices? Get the point? President Paul would have the IAEA watch them and keep them in check but not make irrational decisions because he wanted to fear the American people into another war that this times has an end game.

Attacking Iran is pure suicide for our economy and many of our lives. Ron Paul KNOWS this. Tread lightly. Only go to war if there is a reason. If there is a reason the president goes to congress, finds out if there is a reason to go to war, if so declares war, wins the war swiftly, and then ends the war. Per our constitution.

 

[mjw]

<embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/common/assets/videoplayer/flvplayer.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" wmode="transparent" width="400" height="355" flashvars="file=http://www.theonion.com/content/xml/68210/video&autostart=false&image=http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/BULLSHIT.jpg&bufferlength=3&embedded=true&title=Poll%3A%20Bullshit%20Is%20Most%20Important%20Issue%20For%202008%20Voters"></embed><br/><a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/poll_bullshit_is_most_important?utm_source=embedded_video">Poll: Bullshit Is Most Important Issue For 2008 Voters</a>

 

[Don Keyhoe-Ti]

In all my 34 years on this planet, Ron Paul is the only honest American politican I can recall. Even if all his policies were stupid, (& not all of them are,) I would still support him because he is actually HONEST. I'm just not sure if the world is ready for an honest US president, but I'm hoping to see it given a try.

 

[musictomyears]

Good point. Ron Paul does come across as being very honest.

However, this is not to say that the other candidates are necessarily dishonest. I only recently realised that people can promulgate the most bizarre views, and be totally honest about them. A few days ago I had a long discussion/argument with a few friends about the causes of global warming. They basically repeated - verbatim - what they had heard on TV and read in the media, as if it was gospel truth. I was quoting a few scientific facts back at them, and encouraged them to look those up for themselves, if they didn't believe me. I repeatedly suggested to carry out independent research, rather than simply parrot alarmist headlines. To cut a long story short, I made little progress with my argument, but was accused of all kinds of immoral attitudes. Facts and reason played little role in the discussion, regardless of my attempts to steer it away from emotionally charged opinion and bias.

This experience made me realise that even people who are politically more aware than average generally follow some "higher" authority in their decision making, rather than look at the issues for themselves and draw their own conclusions. I think this is also true for presidential candidates. Maybe they talk using stereotypes, because they think in stereotypes. Let's face it, most of them aren't experts in anything, yet are expected to have profound and penetrating knowledge of just about any issue on Earth. These days, most politicians are former lawyers, and are trained in adopting any viewpoint, as long as it serves their case. Similarly, for politicians, truth is only of relative value, but has to be submitted to a greater cause - such as getting elected.

I'm afraid, just as with regular people, politicians are often ignorant of the very things they talk about. They keep a straight face and hope nobody will notice.

 

[Don Keyhoe-Ti]

That's true what you're saying there. With Ron Paul, he has an indelible record of having The Constitution as his higher authority for decision making. Again, this doesn't always make for perfect results but it seems like it would be worth a try? Unlike with other politicians, you can know exactly where he stands because of this very reason.