He is good at revisionist history like some of you on this forum. But I do not see good forward thinking from him.
Lol now he's a revisionist.. please xplainusmarine2005 wrote:
He is good at revisionist history like some of you on this forum. But I do not see good forward thinking from him.
I agree, no chance in hell on the Republican ticket. Independent will be the way. I'd put money on saying Unity08 will pick him as their candidate.Cougar wrote:
As much as I like Ron Paul, you have to admit, he doesn't have a chance. Even if he wins the primaries, which he probably won't, I doubt the Republican committee would allow him to run on the ticket.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Just kidding. Who has a chance at beating Ron Paul? No one I see.
He did do very well during the last Republican debate. Don't be confused, I have a problem with the RonBots who claim the media is out to destroy him. We have seen this before with claims of disenfranchisement. It seems to me that they are trying to create hysteria to garnish support. I don't know if he gets my vote but I despise manipulation.
Here is something I liked from him at the last debate.
In the middle of the clip, reducing government.
Notice it wasn't Ron getting booed in Fl. It was McCain when he attacked Ron.
Here is something I liked from him at the last debate.
In the middle of the clip, reducing government.
Notice it wasn't Ron getting booed in Fl. It was McCain when he attacked Ron.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I don't have a lot of time so I'll break this post down barney style (mickey mouse style for you old school guys):
Summary: Ron Paul is an idealist with plans that in utopia might work, but not in the current global and domestic scene. His plans would cripple the United States economy, sending it into a depression, and possibly reducing the effectiveness of the Western World to control their own future, perhaps not depending on the strength of the Euro.
Ron Paul wants to do away with the IRS? Where is the country going to get its revenue from? Our taxes are a major source of income for the United States!
He wants to retract the US military for its global deployment. In a debate against McCain he said it was not isolationism but non-interventionism. Well if no one checked lately the United States is rather dependent on the global market, especially on the value of the dollar. If the United States withdraws from around the world as quickly as Ron Paul wants then you could more than likely see a drastic reduction in foreign cooperation with the United States, a shift to the Euro for oil trade, and other economically hampering events.
If Ron Paul had 20 years in office, continuously, and a Congress that supported him throughout then he might be able to implement 75-80% of his ideas effectively without destroying the United States economy and sending it back into a depression worse than the 1930's. One by one implementation of his plans with years to work out the bugs, kinks, and real world interference before starting another would better allow the United States to operate as a more isolated country.
Without a strong monetary unit to support it, any nation will collapse on itself. The United States is spending more money than ever, and some political persona's are trying to print more to make up for it, we won't get in on that lesson, but I fear that if Ron Paul were elected you would see the financial collapse of the United States in short order and the start of a depression that would be felt around the world very quickly mostly through the reduction of grain and food exports and private donation reductions.
Summary: Ron Paul is an idealist with plans that in utopia might work, but not in the current global and domestic scene. His plans would cripple the United States economy, sending it into a depression, and possibly reducing the effectiveness of the Western World to control their own future, perhaps not depending on the strength of the Euro.
Ron Paul wants to do away with the IRS? Where is the country going to get its revenue from? Our taxes are a major source of income for the United States!
He wants to retract the US military for its global deployment. In a debate against McCain he said it was not isolationism but non-interventionism. Well if no one checked lately the United States is rather dependent on the global market, especially on the value of the dollar. If the United States withdraws from around the world as quickly as Ron Paul wants then you could more than likely see a drastic reduction in foreign cooperation with the United States, a shift to the Euro for oil trade, and other economically hampering events.
If Ron Paul had 20 years in office, continuously, and a Congress that supported him throughout then he might be able to implement 75-80% of his ideas effectively without destroying the United States economy and sending it back into a depression worse than the 1930's. One by one implementation of his plans with years to work out the bugs, kinks, and real world interference before starting another would better allow the United States to operate as a more isolated country.
Without a strong monetary unit to support it, any nation will collapse on itself. The United States is spending more money than ever, and some political persona's are trying to print more to make up for it, we won't get in on that lesson, but I fear that if Ron Paul were elected you would see the financial collapse of the United States in short order and the start of a depression that would be felt around the world very quickly mostly through the reduction of grain and food exports and private donation reductions.
You seriously think that having troops all around the world, from Germany to japan to S. Korea is why the world is trading and cooperatin with you?Ridir wrote:
If the United States withdraws from around the world as quickly as Ron Paul wants then you could more than likely see a drastic reduction in foreign cooperation with the United States, a shift to the Euro for oil trade, and other economically hampering events.
You have to realize that your economy is already falling, like your dollar. You have to open your eyes to the fact that you cannot keep that kind of foreign policy without sending your country into bankruptcy.
He's already said 14 thousand times he WILL NOT run as an independent.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
I agree, no chance in hell on the Republican ticket. Independent will be the way. I'd put money on saying Unity08 will pick him as their candidate.Cougar wrote:
As much as I like Ron Paul, you have to admit, he doesn't have a chance. Even if he wins the primaries, which he probably won't, I doubt the Republican committee would allow him to run on the ticket.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Just kidding. Who has a chance at beating Ron Paul? No one I see.
I'd put serious money on Huckabee. It's going to come down to a battle of the religions between Romney and Huckabee. It has been proven time and time again that America will look at two front runners and that is it. A lot of the media has decided that the democratic race is over, and I think that the Iowa caucus will seal the fate of all the 2nd tier candidates like Ron Paul, McCain, and Thompson. Personally, I'd love to see an Edwards/Obama ticket, but that most likely won't happen.
this guy seems to be right on the money. it would take alot longer then his term limits would allow to implement his changes and only with huge support from the senate and congress. and even then we would need someone to take office after 8 years to keep the changes rolling. or let ole ron try the chavez ruler for life BS.Ridir wrote:
I don't have a lot of time so I'll break this post down barney style (mickey mouse style for you old school guys):
Summary: Ron Paul is an idealist with plans that in utopia might work, but not in the current global and domestic scene. His plans would cripple the United States economy, sending it into a depression, and possibly reducing the effectiveness of the Western World to control their own future, perhaps not depending on the strength of the Euro.
Ron Paul wants to do away with the IRS? Where is the country going to get its revenue from? Our taxes are a major source of income for the United States!
He wants to retract the US military for its global deployment. In a debate against McCain he said it was not isolationism but non-interventionism. Well if no one checked lately the United States is rather dependent on the global market, especially on the value of the dollar. If the United States withdraws from around the world as quickly as Ron Paul wants then you could more than likely see a drastic reduction in foreign cooperation with the United States, a shift to the Euro for oil trade, and other economically hampering events.
If Ron Paul had 20 years in office, continuously, and a Congress that supported him throughout then he might be able to implement 75-80% of his ideas effectively without destroying the United States economy and sending it back into a depression worse than the 1930's. One by one implementation of his plans with years to work out the bugs, kinks, and real world interference before starting another would better allow the United States to operate as a more isolated country.
Without a strong monetary unit to support it, any nation will collapse on itself. The United States is spending more money than ever, and some political persona's are trying to print more to make up for it, we won't get in on that lesson, but I fear that if Ron Paul were elected you would see the financial collapse of the United States in short order and the start of a depression that would be felt around the world very quickly mostly through the reduction of grain and food exports and private donation reductions.
I think his popularity surge is just an internet fad. as said before bandwagon jumping. it's going to be an interesting year to see who the main canidates will be. but I dont think ron will be one of them. unless he changes his stance on running as an independent.
We'll see.Cougar wrote:
He's already said 14 thousand times he WILL NOT run as an independent.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
I agree, no chance in hell on the Republican ticket. Independent will be the way. I'd put money on saying Unity08 will pick him as their candidate.Cougar wrote:
As much as I like Ron Paul, you have to admit, he doesn't have a chance. Even if he wins the primaries, which he probably won't, I doubt the Republican committee would allow him to run on the ticket.
I don't think Ridir hit it on the head. He describes alot of where we are headed currently. The Euro will take over oil and the dollar is getting weaker daily. That is due to CURRENT practices in the government. Not Ron Paul or his ideas.Christbane wrote:
this guy seems to be right on the money. it would take alot longer then his term limits would allow to implement his changes and only with huge support from the senate and congress. and even then we would need someone to take office after 8 years to keep the changes rolling. or let ole ron try the chavez ruler for life BS.Ridir wrote:
I don't have a lot of time so I'll break this post down barney style (mickey mouse style for you old school guys):
Summary: Ron Paul is an idealist with plans that in utopia might work, but not in the current global and domestic scene. His plans would cripple the United States economy, sending it into a depression, and possibly reducing the effectiveness of the Western World to control their own future, perhaps not depending on the strength of the Euro.
Ron Paul wants to do away with the IRS? Where is the country going to get its revenue from? Our taxes are a major source of income for the United States!
He wants to retract the US military for its global deployment. In a debate against McCain he said it was not isolationism but non-interventionism. Well if no one checked lately the United States is rather dependent on the global market, especially on the value of the dollar. If the United States withdraws from around the world as quickly as Ron Paul wants then you could more than likely see a drastic reduction in foreign cooperation with the United States, a shift to the Euro for oil trade, and other economically hampering events.
If Ron Paul had 20 years in office, continuously, and a Congress that supported him throughout then he might be able to implement 75-80% of his ideas effectively without destroying the United States economy and sending it back into a depression worse than the 1930's. One by one implementation of his plans with years to work out the bugs, kinks, and real world interference before starting another would better allow the United States to operate as a more isolated country.
Without a strong monetary unit to support it, any nation will collapse on itself. The United States is spending more money than ever, and some political persona's are trying to print more to make up for it, we won't get in on that lesson, but I fear that if Ron Paul were elected you would see the financial collapse of the United States in short order and the start of a depression that would be felt around the world very quickly mostly through the reduction of grain and food exports and private donation reductions.
I think his popularity surge is just an internet fad. as said before bandwagon jumping. it's going to be an interesting year to see who the main canidates will be. but I dont think ron will be one of them. unless he changes his stance on running as an independent.
Income taxes = unconstitutional, never ratified.
Federal Reserve = not federal nor a reserve. Only congress has the power (in the constitution) to print money. The fed determines if we go into a depression or recession all with toy currency backed by nothing(like gold). The Fed is a private bank.
Sure the U.S. is dependant on the world market because large corporations realize they don't have to pay certain taxes or tariffs and can get slave labor in other countries.
These no tariff or free trade agreements are a big deal and need to be looked into.
Let's agree on one thing... the U.S. needs an overhaul and none of the candidates are talking about it because it would jeopardize their chances not to mention any future financial kickbacks. At least Paul is asking the real questions.
My prediction if we stay with mainstream candidates... Law of the seas will pass and we can say goodbye to sovereignty, National health care will be forced upon us, The middle class will be reduced to picking lettuce because of the open borders, and we the people will no longer run our country because our constitution will be unrecognizable.
I'll try anything to avoid all this... give me Ron Paul.
Federal Reserve = not federal nor a reserve. Only congress has the power (in the constitution) to print money. The fed determines if we go into a depression or recession all with toy currency backed by nothing(like gold). The Fed is a private bank.
Sure the U.S. is dependant on the world market because large corporations realize they don't have to pay certain taxes or tariffs and can get slave labor in other countries.
These no tariff or free trade agreements are a big deal and need to be looked into.
Let's agree on one thing... the U.S. needs an overhaul and none of the candidates are talking about it because it would jeopardize their chances not to mention any future financial kickbacks. At least Paul is asking the real questions.
My prediction if we stay with mainstream candidates... Law of the seas will pass and we can say goodbye to sovereignty, National health care will be forced upon us, The middle class will be reduced to picking lettuce because of the open borders, and we the people will no longer run our country because our constitution will be unrecognizable.
I'll try anything to avoid all this... give me Ron Paul.
That's why I like him. I don't even agree with him half the time. But, like you said, he is asking the tough questions. He's putting a lot of money and effort into something which will probably fail anyway. I respect him for that.spacebandit72 wrote:
Let's agree on one thing... the U.S. needs an overhaul and none of the candidates are talking about it because it would jeopardize their chances not to mention any future financial kickbacks. At least Paul is asking the real questions.
Are his plans realistic? No. But imo he knows more about the BS going on in politics today than any other candidate, of either party.
I know that the American Economy is failing, but you also have to realize that have a projected force around the world also keeps certain trade partners from trying to exploit the already fragile situation. The fall of the US economy and dollar (the two are nearly one in the same at this point) was started a few years back with an international run on the dollar that lasted roughly 2 weeks with a massive shift to the Euro. It was a multinational, trans-hemisphere attack on the dollar for President Bush's unilateral decisions in Iraq. Since then the dollar has not recovered and has been on a steady decline.
What Ron Paul wants to do is appease the international community and withdraw from the 'forward' bases. Of course we can stay in the Korean DMZ though, that's a UN mission and no one else wants it. And no one really wants to do any UN police work, just a lot of talk from everyone including the US. Truthfully, if the United States did withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan then the Western and Middle Eastern communities would be appeased. The EU would resume trade on semi-normal affiliation but the United States would never again be in a position to dictate trade, or even bring it even again. The OPEC countries would run away to the Euro under the advise of the Iranian and Venezuelan representatives. This would further hurt the US economy. China, who we are already in a trade deficit with and has more military strength and equal technology, would trade at their will with the US taking what they need and discarding what they don't want.
There are many more examples of what would happen if the United States made a sudden and quick withdraw from the forward deployed stations. Basically the United States is in a lose/lose situation currently, the only way to win is to find a way to limit the damage and lick our wounds for the next five to fifteen years.
This is just for kicks, in my opinion the only way for the US economy to get back on top and stable would be the opening of space to private industry before the private industry becomes too heavily affected by the down swing. The large profits seen now by the oil companies could in fact be the saving grace if they are allowed to R&D mining of heavenly bodies. Of course this brings about a whole new slew of problems like the rapid opening of the American West did (the lawless west that lasted about two decades or so).
What Ron Paul wants to do is appease the international community and withdraw from the 'forward' bases. Of course we can stay in the Korean DMZ though, that's a UN mission and no one else wants it. And no one really wants to do any UN police work, just a lot of talk from everyone including the US. Truthfully, if the United States did withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan then the Western and Middle Eastern communities would be appeased. The EU would resume trade on semi-normal affiliation but the United States would never again be in a position to dictate trade, or even bring it even again. The OPEC countries would run away to the Euro under the advise of the Iranian and Venezuelan representatives. This would further hurt the US economy. China, who we are already in a trade deficit with and has more military strength and equal technology, would trade at their will with the US taking what they need and discarding what they don't want.
There are many more examples of what would happen if the United States made a sudden and quick withdraw from the forward deployed stations. Basically the United States is in a lose/lose situation currently, the only way to win is to find a way to limit the damage and lick our wounds for the next five to fifteen years.
This is just for kicks, in my opinion the only way for the US economy to get back on top and stable would be the opening of space to private industry before the private industry becomes too heavily affected by the down swing. The large profits seen now by the oil companies could in fact be the saving grace if they are allowed to R&D mining of heavenly bodies. Of course this brings about a whole new slew of problems like the rapid opening of the American West did (the lawless west that lasted about two decades or so).
After following the links Kmarion provided, I have been sitting here for almost two hours listening to candidates talk on the fox debates, and other live events.
I have to say Ron Paul is the one guy I've heard talk logically and honestly. Its a shame he got booed sometimes even though he was so right. If only those people who booed would actually consider what he is saying for a moment...
We all know Hilary is a dirt bag money whore.
And I find Mitt Romney to be an asshole and the typical guy who says simple shit to try and impress those around him. Look at this exchange between this poor guy with muscular dystrophy ask him if Romney would arrest him for using medical marijuana. Romney just says he doesn't support medical marijuana and dodges the guys question about arresting him:
I guess this is kinda off the topic of Ron Paul, but I felt it should be posted at least here.
I have to say Ron Paul is the one guy I've heard talk logically and honestly. Its a shame he got booed sometimes even though he was so right. If only those people who booed would actually consider what he is saying for a moment...
We all know Hilary is a dirt bag money whore.
And I find Mitt Romney to be an asshole and the typical guy who says simple shit to try and impress those around him. Look at this exchange between this poor guy with muscular dystrophy ask him if Romney would arrest him for using medical marijuana. Romney just says he doesn't support medical marijuana and dodges the guys question about arresting him:
I guess this is kinda off the topic of Ron Paul, but I felt it should be posted at least here.
Nature is a powerful force. Those who seek to subdue nature, never do so permanently.
Ron Paul is the voice of Libertarianism, something that both major parties have departed from. He appeals to those who want a smaller government and fewer restrictions (myself included in that category). Does he have the best ideas? Probably not, but he is one of the few to consistantly voice a libertarian view that is largely ignored by current politicians. That is what makes him popular. If there was a less extreme libertarian, I might vote for that person, but Ron Paul is the oddball that holds many of my views.
Not perfect, IMHO, but the closest to what I want...
Not perfect, IMHO, but the closest to what I want...
if you wanna go with the "IRS is unconstitutional" route, realize you are also saying every other federal agency is unconstitutional. If thats the case, you must want to live in a cave somewhere where no one can bother you and yours. I suggest maybe moving to somalia where Libertarianism is the law of the land.
^^ And that is why Ron Paul will not get the nomination and will never be elected.
thats why I cant stand the man. I dont think people really realize the platform they are supporting.Stingray24 wrote:
^^ And that is why Ron Paul will not get the nomination and will never be elected.
I think Ron Paul is great and probably the most qualified person for the job. But in American politics, the more qualified you are, the less chance you have. I still plan on voting for him, but it's going to be a waste, he has no chance whatsoever. Especially since the media doesn't give him the attention he deserves. This man can turn our country around and get things on the right track, but no one seems to want that...
how is he the most qualified? sell me ron paul.
He has a vision. Something no one else on either staged has put forth. I've researched his policies and ideas and he has heart. He may not be the right guy for you slinger. But I like what he is saying.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
how is he the most qualified? sell me ron paul.
As an outsider I have a limited frame of reference on this topic but I can say that usually I find myself rooting for Democrats in US elections, this time, however, what I've seen of Ron Paul has me rooting for him. My understanding is that he has more chance of playing for Quatar in a world cup final than actually winning the election though. I saw him on one of the debates and he answered questions on foreign policy that suggested he has more than a healthy dose of common sense and reason in him (that probably rules him out of the presidency right there) and he seemed almost European in his political style. I haven't much of a clue about his domestic economic policies though and that usually is a clincher for most people.
...it could be worse, it could be Hilary Clinton.
...it could be worse, it could be Hilary Clinton.
I respect your opinion mason. We all know no ones mind is going to be changed here. But here is the way I look at Ron paul. Its like the kid in middle school running for class president who says he's going to change the menu in the cafeteria and pipe hip hop in the morning announcements.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
He has a vision. Something no one else on either staged has put forth. I've researched his policies and ideas and he has heart. He may not be the right guy for you slinger. But I like what he is saying.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
how is he the most qualified? sell me ron paul.
Nothing wrong with protect ya neck first thing in the morning.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.