SGT_Dicklewicz
Member
+33|7048
A friend of mine at work brought in this book. I read the preface and find it hard to argue that this guy doesn't know what he is talking about.
Guess I am just wondering if he and I are both nuts  or does it sound like America is in some serious trouble?
The preface is below;

    Every election cycle we are treated to candidates who promise us "change," and 2008 has been no different. But in the American political lexicon, "change" always means more of the same: more government, more looting of Americans, more inflation, more police-state measures, more unnecessary war, and more centralization of power.

    Real change would mean something like the opposite of those things. It might even involve following our Constitution. And that’s the one option Americans are never permitted to hear….

    With national bankruptcy looming, politicians from both parties continue to make multi-trillion dollar promises of "free" goods from the government, and hardly a soul wonders if we can still afford to have troops in – this is not a misprint – 130 countries around the world. All of this is going to come to an end sooner or later, because financial reality is going to make itself felt in very uncomfortable ways. But instead of thinking about what this means for how we conduct our foreign and domestic affairs, our chattering classes seem incapable of speaking in anything but the emptiest platitudes, when they can be bothered to address serious issues at all. Fundamental questions like this, and countless others besides, are off the table in our mainstream media, which focuses our attention on trivialities and phony debates as we march toward oblivion.

    This is the deadening consensus that crosses party lines, that dominates our major media, and that is strangling the liberty and prosperity that were once the birthright of Americans. Dissenters who tell their fellow citizens what is really going on are subject to smear campaigns that, like clockwork, are aimed at the political heretic. Truth is treason in the empire of lies.

    There is an alternative to national bankruptcy, a bigger police state, trillion-dollar wars, and a government that draws ever more parasitically on the productive energies of the American people. It’s called freedom. But as we’ve learned through hard experience, we are not going to hear a word in its favor if our political and media establishments have anything to say about it.

    If we want to live in a free society, we need to break free from these artificial limitations on free debate and start asking serious questions once again. I am happy that my campaign for the presidency has finally raised some of them. But this is a long-term project that will persist far into the future. These ideas cannot be allowed to die, buried beneath the mind-numbing chorus of empty slogans and inanities that constitute official political discourse in America.

    That is why I wrote this book.

-found at - http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/bookbomb.html
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|7130
The Democrat and Republican parties have been offering almost identical, mediocre candidates in every race presidential race for a long time.  I'm surprised he didn't get more support.  I agree with 99% of what he says, but a couple of his ideas are waaaay out there.  I think he would have made one of the best presidents in the past 100 years and I hope he runs next time.

Last edited by Deadmonkiefart (2008-05-08 16:30:22)

AutralianChainsaw
Member
+65|6622
Ron Paul is the most honest politician out there.

Too bad he was marginalized (sp) by the mainstream media.

I dont think he will run again as president, hes getting old. But he woke a lot of american up and we will see another Ron Paul pretty soon.
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7138|US
Both major political parties are concerned with 2 things. 
1. Stay in power
2. Get more power

This is fundamentally at odds with the intent of the limited government created in 1787.
Because both (big government) parties have around 50% of the vote, casting a vote for a party that actually represents your viewpoints is "a waste."  It's sad that voting for the candidate who will best represent your views is now considered wasteful and idiotic...
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6953|Global Command
Our choices this year are between a liberal and so far, two socialists.

I long for a Ron Paul.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6829|North Carolina
For me, Ron is hit or miss.  Some things he supports I love.  Other things are pretty loony.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7024|132 and Bush

AutralianChainsaw wrote:

Too bad he was marginalized (sp) by the mainstream media.
The hysteria his supporters tried to generate with comments like this are what turned most people off.

ATG wrote:

I long for a Ron Paul.
Get a room


PS: Whats he doing with all that money? He hasn't spent much of it at all. Running for Congress with it?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7024|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

For me, Ron is hit or miss.  Some things he supports I love.  Other things are pretty loony.
You know.. like that disagreement you guys have on universal health care. I'm pretty much the same. As a conservative how could I not agree with some of his views?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,991|7056|949

Well, at least he was smart enough to come out with a book at the height of his popularity.

Most honest politician- nope, don't think so.  More honest than the Republicrats for the most part, sure.

Hopefully we won't see another Ron Paul soon, but I long for an intelligent, rational, altruistic, successful business-type person looking to decentralize federal power and break the power-elite/government relationship.
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6892
Ron Paul is listed by Wikipedia as an internet meme. That's all he was.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7024|132 and Bush

^^DoctaStrangelove^^ Should have been the title of his book.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|7130

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Most honest politician- nope, don't think so.  More honest than the Republicrats for the most part, sure.
Are you suggesting that the Democrats are more honest?
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|7130

pierro wrote:

Saying the mainstream is wrong doesn't make you right and that's Ron Paul's problem...although he identifies errors with certain aspects of America, his solutions are far worse then what we have now (the gold standard?)...Ron Paul would be considered mainstream in the 1920s and there is a reason America's moved on...if you think your right, look at a couple of his policies and actually think them through and you'll find that they either contradict each other (eliminate America's debt and income tax) or make no sense whatsoever (get rid of the dept. of education)
Abolish the federal Department of Education.
Paul adopted the Republican Liberty Caucus Position Statement:

    * As adopted by the General Membership of the Republican Liberty Caucus at its Biannual Meeting held December 8, 2000. WHEREAS libertarian Republicans believe in limited government, individual freedom and personal responsibility;
    * WHEREAS we believe that government has no money nor power not derived from the consent of the people;
    * WHEREAS we believe that people have the right to keep the fruits of their labor; and
    * WHEREAS we believe in upholding the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land;

   1. BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Liberty Caucus endorses the following [among its] principles:The US Department of Education should be abolished, leaving education decision making at the state, local or personal level.
   2. Parents have the right to spend their money on the school or method of schooling they deem appropriate for their children.

Source: Republican Liberty Caucus Position Statement 00-RLC2 on Dec 8, 2000
AutralianChainsaw
Member
+65|6622

pierro wrote:

Saying the mainstream is wrong doesn't make you right and that's Ron Paul's problem...although he identifies errors with certain aspects of America, his solutions are far worse then what we have now (the gold standard?)...Ron Paul would be considered mainstream in the 1920s and there is a reason America's moved on...if you think your right, look at a couple of his policies and actually think them through and you'll find that they either contradict each other (eliminate America's debt and income tax) or make no sense whatsoever (get rid of the dept. of education)
The gold standard is worst than the federal reserve system? You just have to look at the recent drop of the US dollar and all the actions taken by the FED and you will see direct relationship between those two.

The FED print money and the governemnt pay the interest back with the income tax, as a result, the central bank get richer and the debt is growing. Having all that power in the hands of a small group of people is not healty.. the founders knew it and that's why they didnt want a central bank..

Paul want to eliminate the income tax yes but its a long term goal.  First you have to cut the spending and that's what he want to do by changing the foreign policy.  Now it is where people disagree.. Some think that America is better "safe" by running an empire around the world and having war after war to "secure" the motherland and other think that America is already bankrupt and the best thing to do is bring the troops home and stop sending money all around the world to buy friendship with other countries.

The fact is Ron Paul is the only guy who didn't lie about the economical situation and offer an answer to the problem.. the two democrats want to spend even more and the republican want to start WW3.

But like i said, he woke a lot of people up .. thanks to the internet.

Edit: For those interested in the subject, there a very good (and old) movie about the central banking system.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … -wHah7mzDA

*WARNING* its more than 2 hours long but it will open your eyes on a lot of things.. and don't worry it's not a "loose change" type of movie..

Last edited by AutralianChainsaw (2008-05-09 06:15:49)

JahManRed
wank
+646|7052|IRELAND

This guy seams like the real deal to me.

Can someone give me a run down on him from an Americans prospective. Why isn't he president?

He sounds abit like Tony Blair 15 years ago with the New Labour, New Britain, New fucking everything bullshit his spin doctors threw to the eager voters sick of an elitist Tory government.
Which actually turned out to be New Problems, New mega rich, new mega poor, new social injustice, New crime riddle streets...........................
In fairness he sounds like he wants to embrace some socialist principles. The only problem is IMO, you have to go full on socialism or full on capitalism. Blair/Brown tried to mixed them up with terrible results, the NHS for one.
AutralianChainsaw
Member
+65|6622

JahManRed wrote:

Why isn't he president?
Here's my answer:



Like it or not, the american presidents are chosen by the media, People are listening to the TV and make their choice. When you keep hearing that a candidate cannot win, that he is an isolationist or a loon, you will not waste your vote on him even if he have the best idea. 

Well around 10% of the poeple voted for him so all hope are not lost.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6829|North Carolina

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Most honest politician- nope, don't think so.  More honest than the Republicrats for the most part, sure.
Are you suggesting that the Democrats are more honest?
Good point...  but maybe a better statement would be...  Obama is more honest than McCain.
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|7190|UK

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

intelligent, rational, altruistic, successful business-type person looking to decentralize federal power and break the power-elite/government relationship.
Um lol. There is no such thing. Someone who is successful in business that moves into politics is more than likely bored of just being rich, they want some power too.
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7138|US
The FED does not "just print more money."  It is a LOT more complex than that.  Their normal tool is changing interest rates.  If banks do not loan as much money to each other (to maintain their reserves), they loan less to others, thus decreasing the real money supply.
PureFodder
Member
+225|6709
It would have been nice for Ron to have won just to show western democracies that it is possible to completely buck political trends and elect someone who isn't a suit, reciting lines written by someone else and smiling for the camera.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7024|132 and Bush

Kmarion wrote:

PS: Whats he doing with all that money? He hasn't spent much of it at all. Running for Congress with it?
Anyone?


Paul: Obama’s the best choice on foreign policy
Oh.. snizap.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,991|7056|949

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Most honest politician- nope, don't think so.  More honest than the Republicrats for the most part, sure.
Are you suggesting that the Democrats are more honest?
How did my response lead you to that conclusion?

To answer your question, no, I'm not.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6829|North Carolina

JahManRed wrote:

This guy seams like the real deal to me.

Can someone give me a run down on him from an Americans prospective. Why isn't he president?

He sounds abit like Tony Blair 15 years ago with the New Labour, New Britain, New fucking everything bullshit his spin doctors threw to the eager voters sick of an elitist Tory government.
Which actually turned out to be New Problems, New mega rich, new mega poor, new social injustice, New crime riddle streets...........................
In fairness he sounds like he wants to embrace some socialist principles. The only problem is IMO, you have to go full on socialism or full on capitalism. Blair/Brown tried to mixed them up with terrible results, the NHS for one.
Ron Paul is a right-leaning Libertarian.  He also believes in decentralization of government, especially on social issues (letting states decide social policy rather than the feds).

Libertarianism, in a nutshell, is the principle of self-government.  They believe in minimizing government in every way.  This means very little war, no social programs, hands-off your personal life social policy, and very low taxes.  Some of it is great, but other parts are just loony.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7024|132 and Bush

Protection from enemies foreign and domestic..that's it. Constitution .. check it out.

National banks, federal education programs, welfare, etc.. those are absolute trouble. Some of our founding fathers had it right (Jefferson), some of them promoted wealth disparity through unjust taxation (Madison). Sovereignty should lie with the people, and states rights should trump the Fed with all things that are not in common defense. When we left these principles we created our own runaway train.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
AutralianChainsaw
Member
+65|6622

Kmarion wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

PS: Whats he doing with all that money? He hasn't spent much of it at all. Running for Congress with it?
Anyone?


Paul: Obama’s the best choice on foreign policy
Oh.. snizap.
He cannot use the money from the presidential campaign on his congress run so he asked his loyal supporters to raise some money and won back his seat. Dunno what he will do with the money but theres a lot of laws who prevent him from using it for personnal purpose. We will probably know more when the presidential election is over.

And yea i saw that video where he say that Obama is the best choice out of the three remaining candidates.. i agree with him too.. i think Obama once said he would prefer talking to the Iranians instead of threatening them.. It's a good step in the right direction.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard