It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Ron Paul Press Conference: No Run For President (2008)

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+5 more 
posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 10:34 AM
Mod Edit: Please note that this thread is from 2008

The 'major' announcement at the National Press Club, covered by most major news organizations and streamed live over the internet by CNN, left more than a few disappointed supporters. While rumors and speculation persisted as to what the announcement would be about, and a certain ATS thread is now actually untrue, (which is why the title of it needs to be changed if we are to deny ignorance), some key points made at the conference included:

1) Ron Paul has got the other parties to all agree on 4 principal statements:

We Agree

Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.

Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.

The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.

The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.

2) Ron Paul's main purpose for the conference appeared to be to encourage and give rationale for 3rd party votes, saying he was directly opposed to the idea that a vote for a 3rd party candidate was wasted, and that on the contrary, a vote for one of the two major parties was wasted, because there will essentially be no fundamental change on so many issues including the Federal Reserve, foreign policy, and many other issues.

3) An interesting moment occurred when a reporter from Russia Today asked Ron Paul about a phone call he received from the McCain campaign asking him again to endorse McCain. (ROFL, like after being outcast from the RNC, to the point of holding his own successful rally in protest, he's about to endorse Mccain! :shk: ) The reporter then said that Russia Today was very interested in doing another extended interview with him, and giving Ron Paul the press coverage that the MSM did not.

4) Cynthia McKinney also had some interesting things to add, saying that essentially more focus was needed on the election system, and pointing out that the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen. She also was opposed, as was Ron Paul, to the idea of the US putting the taxpayers in additional debt of $ 1 billion in an aid package to Georgia, and she said that humanitarian shipments on US military vessels was inappropriate.

5) C-SPAN video coverage of this event will be available shortly at this link:

6) Another note: Bob Barr did not show up to the conference, but ironically will be at another press conference AT THE SAME FACILITY AT 12 noon today.

[edit on 10-9-2008 by TrueAmerican]
edit on 12-9-2011 by Gemwolf because: Added 2008 to title to avoid confusion.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:13 AM
I am disappointed, but thank you for setting the record straight.

For a moment, I thought there might be a chance, however slim, that the Central Banks, transnational corporations, and the mega-wealthy social-elite power whores were going to be challenged.


posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:23 AM
reply to post by Maxmars

I know man, I am disappointed too, and there are many others making comments to that effect at the CFL site. As to setting the record straight, you're welcome, and thanks for responding to the truth, as much as it hurts.

As many are pointing out, there was too much fluff over this 'major' announcement. Many of his supporters were already predisposed to vote 3rd party if necessary, so there really wasn't much news here. But I think we need to extract from this the more important matter of what the campaign for liberty is doing, and the long term effectiveness of the program to the young people.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:24 AM
That bit about moving troops out of iraq is rather telling. Seems bush is moving them to afghanistan and here in my neighbor hood it was just announced on the tele 3,500 national guard are called to duty. Bring some home, send some over.

I know ron paul means well, but its that secret bunch that makes me believe they will make it look all pretty on the outside while doing the dirty on the inside.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:42 AM
That is disappointing why isnt he running?
I wonder how many people will still write him in? we could reall use the change he'll bring.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:44 AM
Oh, and another thing:

If there are 52 flags on that other thread

which is now flat out untrue, you all better get to flagging the truth (this thread), if we are to deny ignorance. I never understood why it took so long on anything but the biggest of ATS threads to change the title of something once it has been proven to be untrue. I mean christ, we're sitting here telling them, and I'd be willing to bet that at least one moderator has seen this thread, and yet so many people are STILL under the impression that Ron Paul is running for president and he is uniting the 3rd parties under his umbrella.
All because they just don't change the title of that other thread or put HOAX next to it or SOMETHING.

It is so true that the truth even at ATS still remains hidden, underexposed, and drops off the radar like a lead balloon, like this thread will, unless you all do something about it.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:54 AM
Thanks for posting this. That sucks that he isn't running. I had a feeling that the other thread was wrong, thats why I never commented on it. It would have been nice if it was though..

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:56 AM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

Thank you for posting this. I would have eventually heard it but my news normally originates here on ATS. Well, at least my investigation of the news reported here does.

Though it is a bit disappointing it is good to know that the other parties have come together on this. You know what? I really think that if those parties unite as one and put ONE candidate up then there just may be a chance in a free election without fraudulent counting.

I say, that if you were going to write Paul's name in that you don't. Now it appears that it really will be a wasted vote. I say that we ALL vote for the third party rep. The one that will be on the ballot. Instead of throwing a vote away we may actually make some history here.

Just my thoughts.

Thanks again OP.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:02 PM
reply to post by dariousg

any news on who is taking up the third party for the ballot.
i wasnt going to vote at all if paul wasnt running but i guess going third party is better that voting for mccain obama or not voting at all....

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:03 PM
Why the surprise here? Ron Paul comes across as a man of his word and, long ago, he said he would NOT run for the presidency for another party.

And wrtiting his name in now, wouldn't get him elected. It will just be one less vote for someone who could really use the vote. Such as Bob Barr.

Bob Barr seems to be the candidate that most parralells Ron Paul's beliefs.

So if you like Ron Paul, which I do, vote for Bob Barr.

[edit on 9/10/2008 by Blueracer]

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:16 PM
reply to post by ...and justice for some

See the post following yours.
There's the answer for you and I agree.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:24 PM
reply to post by Blueracer

Ron Paul has indeed stuck to his guns, and is not running 3rd party. It is what he has always said. I still think though that the whole entire non-establishment crowd would benefit more and have some kind of small chance for this election, if all the other 3rd parties dropped candidacy, and endorsed Ron Paul under a new party, potentially called the Freedom Party. Ron Paul has a much better chance under this scenario than Barr will as the Libertarian candidate on his own.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:26 PM
Hmmmm, seriously, the post that stated Paul was going to announce he was running for president sure got a lot of attention and flags yet this one seems to be sitting here dying. It's just as important because I think the message now is, vote third party but vote for ONE third party member. If that can happen then maybe there CAN be a dent put in this election.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:28 PM
so... who are you going to vote for - those of you that wanted to vote for Ron Paul? What is the option? Is there a certain 3rd party candidate that will be leading the pack? Have I overlooked that part somewhere?

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:32 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

But that is not going to happen. Ron Paul is no longer running for the presidency.

If people were going to support Ron Paul, how can they not vote for Bob Barr now? And Bob Barr has to be the top 3rd party choice. Maybe Nader but Nader and Paul don't share the same political views. Paul and Barr do.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:35 PM
reply to post by dariousg

Well, we're doing ok so far, it takes time. In the meantime, there have been over 200 responses from Ron Paul supporters in reaction to the conference here:

I have long admired RP's consistency record, but this is the one time I could easily tolerate him flipping on his word, and doing something like I am suggesting above- running third party.

But his overall strategy seems to be maintain the House seat first, and if he drops, he'd lose his seat. And on that note, it is tough to disagree. We need him in Congress, AT THE VERY LEAST. I mean could we seriously regard life as important anymore if we had to do without watching him school all the top dogs in Congress?

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 01:22 PM
I'm sorry to hear that Ron Paul won't be running. I actually spent some time in thought and discussion with my husband yesterday on the subject of "What if Ron Paul announces a run on an Independent ticket"?

Sadly, that conversation is moot.

I supported Paul until right around the time he dropped out of the race (the first time) and I put my support behind Obama. So, that's who I will vote for.

I was concerned that, even if, by some strange miracle, Ron Paul did get elected, he wouldn't be able to make the sweeping changes he wanted with the discomfort of the other 2 branches of government. Obama may not make as much change as Paul, but he'll certainly do better than McCain.

The other 4 candidates Paul endorsed have no way of winning, and I won't give my vote to them if it means one more vote for McCain. I won't do it.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 01:50 PM
All is not Lost........

Bob Barr just asked Ron Paul to be his VP

Atlanta, GA – Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party nominee for president, has invited GOP Congressman Ron Paul to be his running mate in the upcoming election. In a letter sent to Paul, Barr called Paul one of the “few American patriots” who exist in today’s society, and asked him to “seriously consider this final offer as an opportunity to show true, lasting leadership beyond party politics.”

Ron Paul for VP

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:07 PM
reply to post by ...and justice for some

That's a good update man, thanks. Anyone listening to the Alex Jones show today would have just heard him say: Barr is not trustworthy. If that is the case, I doubt RP will accept. In fact, Bob Barr didn't show up to RP's press conference, instead opting for another, and now wants RP to run as his VP?

No news yet of this letter or any answer from Paul as of this writing yet on the CFL website.

BH: I hear ya, and best to vote where your logic takes you. Keep a heads up though on this new development of a possible Barr/Paul campaign- I just don't see it likely.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:21 PM
So it's decided then. Vote Bob Barr, and Ron Paul for VP.

What else could we do?

On a side note, while some of us might be dashed by this news, it's still good news. There are more people behind the movement now.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in