You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
Hey guys. I was wondering, what does everybody think about Ron Paul? What are the pros and cons? Personally I think the guy is very interesting and would love to see him run. but I know theres alot of political opinions on this board and would like to hear your respected opinions, because I really don't know too much about Dr. Paul.
He has a ton of online support... it's interesting.
Some of these films are sort of cheesy but do bring up some interesting points. I'm also interested because this guy seems to speak against the IRS and about the falling dollar and I know James and Pollux talk about these things alot.
Deals with the IRS and taxes for most of the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWfIhFhelm8
I really like this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7d_e9lr … re=related
Ron Paul and Bill O'Reilly duke it out over Iran
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7JPvbVsDdY
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
He's the best candidate out there, no doubt about that. Although, these days that isn't necessarily saying a lot.
He's what I call a true conservative. Believes in the constitution and small government, which makes him the only one in this campaign. Something the founding fathers were very adamant about. He wants to abolish what he considers unconstitutional institutions like the FED and the IRS. He also wants to get rid of most government agencies, in their present form, such as the CIA, FBI, Homeland Security etc.
All in all these are good cases, but it's important to sometimes understand what he means. Getting rid of the CIA isn't the same as saying "get rid of our intelligence protection". He just feels that the CIA in their present form is way overstepping their bounds, like doing torture and running drugs.
However there are some shady issues about the man too. He seems to be supporting absolute capitalism, ie. he wants to abolish welfare, health care and public schools. Now I agree that all of these need change, and I understand his reasoning for those principles. But this is where I feel he's letting principle and ideology getting in the way of common sense. I'm all for a free marked, but fact is not everyone is going to succeed in such a system. So I think there should be some kind of safety network or guarantee of living in place. The economy isn't everything.
Bottom line though, if you're going to vote next year vote for Paul. He may not be perfect but in the light of the alternatives he comes pretty damn close. You want change, vote Paul. You want things to continue like they are, vote whoever else.
- Communist China
- Rep: 130
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
I talked to some of the Ron Paul camp at a Bills game and I don't know... he doesn't have a shot so what's the point? He's just a Republican Kucinich. An anti-war Republican will not get elected by the elephants, and the polls already make that clear.
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
He's too far right, and thats what will stop him from ever winning the presidency. Polluxlm pretty much hit the nail on the head. Getting rid of the FED and IRS?? The public can get behind that easily. Get rid of the CIA, welfare, public schools,etc.? Sorry, no one is dumb enough to fall for that.
His main issue(dumping the FED) is what caused him to get a huge buzz earlier this year. The country was seriously ready to consider such a thing. Then he goes and ruins that idea and his campaign by mentioning other issues.
Cant get rid of the CIA. Can it be overhauled and someone clean house? Sure. Cant get rid of it though.
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
I agree with you all on this. Some people are so quick to point the finger they don't look at the logic or consequences that will occur. "Gov't is too big" "abolish welfare" "eliminate taxes & the IRS"!!
OK 
Now, when we lay off all these government employees, almost eliminate taxes, and get rid of welfare, where will these million or so former government workers get jobs? How will we pay for things like police, teachers, trashmen?? People need to face it, we need taxes to pay for government jobs to keep people employed. FDR created it in the 30's & 40's during the Depression as most of America was out of work, so he created the WPA where citizens built alot of roads & local parks.
Some people love to hear what he says, but logically it wouldn't work. Besides, the House & Senate would veto just about every measure he put forth, and they would turn down every motion he put forth. I do think Michael Bloomburg, mayor of NYC, might run for President as a 3rd party.
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
Why is Ron Paul a psycho? For not wanting to be in a war we really shouldn't be in in the first place? For stating that alot of the reason Islamics hate us is because we go and install dictators in their countries and have been doing so since the 50's?
If anything watching Mayor Guliani and Romney talk about how we need to increase the military and jumping in to Iran made me think "what a bunch of wackos"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consider America "great record" in the middle east since the 1940's
The list below presents some specific incidents of U.S. policy in the Middle East. The list minimizes the grievances against the United States in the region because it excludes more generalized long‑standing policies, such as U.S. backing for authoritarian regimes (arming Saudi Arabia, training the secret police in Iran under the Shah, providing arms and aid to Turkey as it ruthlessly attacked Kurdish villages, etc.). The list also excludes many actions of Israel in which the United States is indirectly implicated because of its military, diplomatic, and economic backing for Israel.
Whether any of these grievances actually motivated those who organized the horrific and utterly unjustified attacks of September 11 is unknown. But the grievances surely helped to create the environment which breeds anti-American terrorism.
1947-48: U.S. backs Palestine partition plan. Israel established. U.S. declines to press Israel to allow expelled Palestinians to return.
1949: CIA backs military coup deposing elected government of Syria.1
1953: CIA helps overthrow the democratically‑elected Mossadeq government in Iran (which had nationalized the British oil company) leading to a quarter‑century of repressive and dictatorial rule by the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi.
1956: U.S. cuts off promised funding for Aswan Dam in Egypt after Egypt receives Eastern bloc arms.
1956: Israel, Britain, and France invade Egypt. U.S. does not support invasion, but the involvement of its NATO allies severely diminishes Washington's reputation in the region.
1958: U.S. troops land in Lebanon to preserve "stability".
early 1960s: U.S. unsuccessfully attempts assassination of Iraqi leader, Abdul Karim Qassim.2
1963: U.S. supports coup by Iraqi Ba'ath party (soon to be headed by Saddam Hussein) and reportedly gives them names of communists to murder, which they do with vigor.3
1967‑: U.S. blocks any effort in the Security Council to enforce SC Resolution 242, calling for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in the 1967 war.
1970: Civil war between Jordan and PLO. Israel and U.S. discuss intervening on side of Jordan if Syria backs PLO.
1972: U.S. blocks Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat's efforts to reach a peace agreement with Israel.
1973: Airlifted U.S. military aid enables Israel to turn the tide in war with Syria and Egypt.
1973‑75: U.S. supports Kurdish rebels in Iraq. When Iran reaches an agreement with Iraq in 1975 and seals the border, Iraq slaughters Kurds and U.S. denies them refuge. Kissinger secretly explains that "covert action should not be confused with missionary work."4
1975: U.S. vetoes Security Council resolution condemning Israeli attacks on Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon.5
1978‑79: Iranians begin demonstrations against the Shah. U.S. tells Shah it supports him "without reservation" and urges him to act forcefully. Until the last minute, U.S. tries to organize military coup to save the Shah, but to no avail.6
1979‑88: U.S. begins covert aid to Mujahideen in Afghanistan six months before Soviet invasion in Dec. 1979.7 Over the next decade U.S. provides training and more than $3 billion in arms and aid.
1980‑88: Iran‑Iraq war. When Iraq invades Iran, the U.S. opposes any Security Council action to condemn the invasion. U.S. soon removes Iraq from its list of nations supporting terrorism and allows U.S. arms to be transferred to Iraq. At the same time, U.S. lets Israel provide arms to Iran and in 1985 U.S. provides arms directly (though secretly) to Iran. U.S. provides intelligence information to Iraq. Iraq uses chemical weapons in 1984; U.S. restores diplomatic relations with Iraq. 1987 U.S. sends its navy into the Persian Gulf, taking Iraq's side; an overly‑aggressive U.S. ship shoots down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing 290.
1981, 1986: U.S. holds military maneuvers off the coast of Libya in waters claimed by Libya with the clear purpose of provoking Qaddafi. In 1981, a Libyan plane fires a missile and U.S. shoots down two Libyan planes. In 1986, Libya fires missiles that land far from any target and U.S. attacks Libyan patrol boats, killing 72, and shore installations. When a bomb goes off in a Berlin nightclub, killing three, the U.S. charges that Qaddafi was behind it (possibly true) and conducts major bombing raids in Libya, killing dozens of civilians, including Qaddafi's adopted daughter.8
1982: U.S. gives "green light" to Israeli invasion of Lebanon,9 killing some 17 thousand civilians.10 U.S. chooses not to invoke its laws prohibiting Israeli use of U.S. weapons except in self‑defense. U.S. vetoes several Security Council resolutions condemning the invasion.
1983: U.S. troops sent to Lebanon as part of a multinational peacekeeping force; intervene on one side of a civil war, including bombardment by USS New Jersey. Withdraw after suicide bombing of marine barracks.
1984: U.S.‑backed rebels in Afghanistan fire on civilian airliner.11
1987-92: U.S. arms used by Israel to repress first Palestinian Intifada. U.S. vetoes five Security Council resolution condemning Israeli repression.
1988: Saddam Hussein kills many thousands of his own Kurdish population and uses chemical weapons against them. The U.S. increases its economic ties to Iraq.
1988: U.S. vetoes 3 Security Council resolutions condemning continuing Israeli occupation of and repression in Lebanon.
1990‑91: U.S. rejects any diplomatic settlement of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (for example, rebuffing any attempt to link the two regional occupations, of Kuwait and of Palestine). U.S. leads international coalition in war against Iraq. Civilian infrastructure targeted.12 To promote "stability" U.S. refuses to aid post‑war uprisings by Shi'ites in the south and Kurds in the north, denying the rebels access to captured Iraqi weapons and refusing to prohibit Iraqi helicopter flights.13
1991‑: Devastating economic sanctions are imposed on Iraq. U.S. and Britain block all attempts to lift them. Hundreds of thousands die. Though Security Council had stated that sanctions were to be lifted once Saddam Hussein's programs to develop weapons of mass destruction were ended, Washington makes it known that the sanctions would remain as long as Saddam remains in power. Sanctions in fact strengthen Saddam's position. Asked about the horrendous human consequences of the sanctions, Madeleine Albright (U.S. ambassador to the UN and later Secretary of State) declares that "the price is worth it."14
1991-: U.S. forces permanently based in Saudi Arabia.
1993‑: U.S. launches missile attack on Iraq, claiming self‑defense against an alleged assassination attempt on former president Bush two months earlier.15
1998: U.S. and U.K. bomb Iraq over the issue of weapons inspections, even though Security Council is just then meeting to discuss the matter.
1998: U.S. destroys factory producing half of Sudan's pharmaceutical supply, claiming retaliation for attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya and that factory was involved in chemical warfare. Evidence for the chemical warfare charge widely disputed.16
2000-: Israel uses U.S. arms in attempt to crush Palestinian uprising, killing hundreds of civilians.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALSO... from the former head of the CIA's Bin Laden unit...
Former head of the CIA's bin Laden unit, Michael Scheuer, said of Paul's statements: "Last week, Representative Paul did all Americans an immense service by simply pointing out the obvious: Our Islamist enemies do not give a damn about the way we vote, think, or live.... We are indeed hated and being warred against because we are 'over there,' and not for what we are and how we live. Our failure to recognize the truth spoken by Mr. Paul - and spelled out for us in hundreds of pages of statements by Osama bin Laden since 1996 - is leading America toward military and economic disaster.... And no matter how you view Mr. Paul's words, you can safely take one thing to the bank. The person most shaken by Mr. Paul's frankness was Osama bin Laden, who knows that the current status quo in U.S. foreign policy toward the Islamic world is al-Qaeda's one indispensable ally, and the only glue that provides cohesion between and among the diverse and often fractious Islamist groups that follow its banner."
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
Did anyone see the debate last night? Ron Paul is a pyscho. I was shocked with how far out there he seemed. Especially when talking about terrorism and the reasons for the Islamic Jihad against America.
No, I missed the debates last night but I do know his campaign is over. Anyone who donates to him at this point just has money to waste. He has now become a fringe candidate and will never come within a light year of the presidency.
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
If you guys are bored there is an alternative to the Fox news Republican debate (which Paul was barred from.) Ron Paul will take questions from an audience of undecided voters in the Granite State.. you can watch the stream here
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/snippets/127 … -townhall/
EDIT: Starts at 5PM ET tonight... so in about 20 min
Re: Ron Paul. Why not?
If you guys are bored there is an alternative to the Fox news Republican debate (which Paul was barred from.) Ron Paul will take questions from an audience of undecided voters in the Granite State.. you can watch the stream here
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/snippets/127 … -townhall/
EDIT: Starts at 5PM ET tonight... so in about 20 min
No one is going to watch that. The playoffs are on.:haha:
