An Article About Ron Paul That Would Make Any Intelligent Hardcore Liberal Vote Ron Paul 2012!!

I will not be voting for Paul and neither will any
members of my family due to his intentions
of eliminating Medicare, Social Security.
My parents worked over 60 yrs and inputed
into this fund and now when it comes time
to receive their benefits, they will be stolen.
Like hell they will.

www.rawstory.com...

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I will not be voting for Paul and neither will any
members of my family due to his intentions
of eliminating Medicare, Social Security.
My parents worked over 60 yrs and inputed
into this fund and now when it comes time
to receive their benefits, they will be stolen.
Like hell they will.

www.rawstory.com...

I had no idea Saint...

My problem with the right is the idea of privatizing both, I doubt Paul would want to do that, I think the GOP
would.

Could you imagine what Wallstreet or UHC would do with that volume of "free" taxpayer generated money?

Invest in Chinese military and then bet they will blow us to hell

and/or

Create diseases to demand more premium inflation

There has got to be a better way to support these programs, but the fact is many folk depend on these things
my mother included, ALL of my elders in fact

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


THANK YOU!

When the media tells you a candidate is 2nd-tier, a long-short, dark horse, no chance of winning, whatever - there's a very good chance they are talking about the one they don't want to win.

That's when you need to start taking a VERY GOOD LOOK at that candidate to find out why, exactly, they are not pimping him at you like they did all the jerks that got you into trouble in the first place.

You'd be very surprised to find out which candidates that "cannot win" can win if all the people that believe in their message and best represent their views ACTUALLY TAKE THE EFFORT TO SUPPORT AND VOTE FOR THEM.

Nothing to see here, just move along...if you want everything to keep going the way it has been.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Janky Red

 

you misunderstood me

pull the troops out is fine with me but with the caviats of:

the economic security of this country wall street and the oil prices and gasoline prices market crash is possible and the speculation of oil driving the prices even higher and when that happens everything from food and clothing skyrockets.
the power vacuum left out there in the rest of the world and what new threats will be created from it.


i never said i didnt agree with paul bringing the troops home since the missions have been skewed to what noone recognizes.

those actions have consequences that most people are not even thinking about its just bring em home save money and then what?

i do not know you do not know and paul does not know but if he wants the job of president then he better find those answers pretty damn quick,

its one thing to promise people things and then then deliever them but whats is the real cost?.

isolationism hasnt worked out too well for the past 20 years and the last decade was proof of that but you got then answers i am all ears if paul has em i am all ears.

but someone better have a plan if not it is totally and utterly pointless because we will be right back at square one.

Paul is correct IMO when he states that we have such a capacity, that NO COUNTRY could threaten us due to M.A.D. All we have to do is push a button and the world is toast, let alone a country...

its one thing to promise people things and then then deliever them but whats is the real cost?.

This above is exactly how I feel about medicare,,, what insurance company would insure a 70 year old person with a heart condition?

NONE, it is a losing investment

Therefore, the other alternative is to let them croak





I

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I will not be voting for Paul and neither will any
members of my family due to his intentions
of eliminating Medicare, Social Security.
My parents worked over 60 yrs and inputed
into this fund and now when it comes time
to receive their benefits, they will be stolen.
Like hell they will.

www.rawstory.com...

He talks about medicare and stuff at 4:00

reply to post by Janky Red


it took 3 planes with 19 highjackers to bring this country to its knees nukes are outdated when talking about mutually assured distruction.

i got news for you that 70 year old is a gonner when medicaid and medicare go bankrupt.

and that in my opinion is a losing investment.

reply to post by boondock-saint


No offense intended, BS, but this is a serious misrepresentation of Paul's views.

People who have paid into the system would be able to remain in it. People who want out to secure their own futures with their own savings would be free to do so.

As the current rate goes of new payees coming into the systems as compared to current payers, and the rate at which this relationship changes increases, the validity of the system (which is, in fact, a ponzi scheme) comes into serious question. We won't even address congress and the like allegedly dipping their hand into the till.

Paul has also stated in previous debates that you could maintain the validity of these systems for those who want to remain in them by cutting spending in the other areas which our government likes to waste money. There is no 'kicking grandma to the curb" here.

Then again, you also have to consider what power a president has, and what kind of presidential-usurper (as far as outstepping the bounds of office authorities) powers Paul would even see fit to exercise here. I don't believe he would see it as within his power to even try to take such a step, so you have to realize that congress would temper...well...damned near anything Paul wanted to implement.

There are things you have to be realistic about here. If I've misunderstood these topics, well, I'm here to learn and want the best options. And if there are better options out there than Paul as far as this goes, I'll gladly consider them. I just know it seems like we're pretty much near the end of the line if we don't really make a change, and there doesn't seem to be much of it out there other than Paul.

Be well.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Janky Red

 

it took 3 planes with 19 highjackers to bring this country to its knees nukes are outdated when talking about mutually assured distruction.

i got news for you that 70 year old is a gonner when medicaid and medicare go bankrupt.

and that in my opinion is a losing investment.

Pauls point in the video I posted is that, large military presence will not deter terrorists, large military presences
do deter entire nations but so do nukes.

Medicare and Medicaid will go bankrupt because politicians will mismanage them and defund them on purpose.

I know you are pro life, why are you not concerned for our elders in this regard?

reply to post by Janky Red


nukes do not deter terrorism in fact terrorists want them and they will use them.

why am i not concerned ? because of the rampant fraud within the system.

people should have been planning for their golden years and not rely of something that can be taken away on a political whim.

i am agianst the promotion of dependency because thats the only thing it does why do anything in life when people can sit of their collective duffs and be handed everything and to borrow the phrase from cradle to grave.

freedom and independence those precious words have become hollow tripe.

Originally posted by Praetorius
No offense intended, BS, but this is a serious misrepresentation of Paul's views.

People who have paid into the system would be able to remain in it. People who want out to secure their own futures with their own savings would be free to do so.

no offense taken my friend

and it is my opinion that an opt in/out
solution will NOT work for the masses.

and privatization will only feed TPTB,
not the folk depending on it to survive.
Just look what Obamacare has done
already as an example.

reply to post by boondock-saint


For something that has yet to be fully implemented (look to 2014), Obamacare has already destroyed the country more than 8 years of Bush or 3 wars could ever hope to do.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Janky Red

 

nukes do not deter terrorism in fact terrorists want them and they will use them.

why am i not concerned ? because of the rampant fraud within the system.

people should have been planning for their golden years and not rely of something that can be taken away on a political whim.

i am agianst the promotion of dependency because thats the only thing it does why do anything in life when people can sit of their collective duffs and be handed everything and to borrow the phrase from cradle to grave.

freedom and independence those precious words have become hollow tripe

Well I am not sure about the Elders you know, but my grandparents and mother worked 150 years between them,
my dad never collected but worked his entire life. Many people do not have the capacity to earn enough to retire
flat out... Many people I know live check to check, it is mathematically impossible to save their way into a lasting retirement.

I think you have a negative view of your fellow Americans, I see them in a positive light... I could never be convinced that giving a person medical attention is evil or wrong, never, bet my soul to the devil Jesus would agree with me too.

Are you Old Neo?

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Janky Red

 

nukes do not deter terrorism in fact terrorists want them and they will use them.

That is why you don't let terrorist in the submarines

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Janky Red

 

why am i not concerned ? because of the rampant fraud within the system.

Sorry,

My point to this is, less the fraud, if people cannot access medical care, more than a few will die prematurely...

Less the fraud, how do they preserve their life? Life is valuable right?

This is what I wonder

reply to post by Janky Red


i know alot of old people geez

and it is mathematically impossible to pay for everything and everyone in this country there is simply not enough money to go around.

i never said anything remotely about denying people who truly deserve care but the governments involvment has had detrimental effects.

and i am sorry to tell you jesus was not a liberal to wit " the lord helps those who help themselves. "

my age has nothing to do with this conversation since i am not the topic of this thread.

thems the brakes.


and there are other places where nukes are just sayin

reply to post by Blackmarketeer

RP has a serious blind spot when it comes to the policies of his own party and has never stood up to them in regarding the war in Afghanistan, Iraq nor the constitutional crisis Bush put us through. Let's see if he can put his money where his mouth is.

You apparently did not follow his campaign or know much about his career. He has stood up to them on every one of those issues and many more and done so for 30 years. He was the lone republican who voted against the Iraq war. Wants to bring the troops home from Iraq and around the world Afghanistan included. Voted against the patriot acts, military commissions act, veterans disarmament act etc. etc. and has been an out spoken critic of every piece of anti-constitutional legislation they have promoted. They don't call him Dr No for nothing!

reply to post by boondock-saint


From the interview I saw with him being asked about those issues, he straight up said, "yes, I want to end it, but not immediately, it would cause too much trouble, I want to end the wars first to cut costs, and I would not end it without some kind of transition that took into account the people too far invested in it to change."

He did not say at all he wanted to snatch the rug out from under people who based all their retirement strategy on having that money. He sounded more like he wanted to phase it out for the younger people who would not likely get their money out anyway.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Ron Paul is far from perfect, but I’ll say this much for the Texas congressman: He has never authorized a drone strike in Pakistan. He has never authorized the killing of dozens of women and children in Yemen. He hasn’t protected torturers from prosecution and he hasn’t overseen the torturous treatment of a 23-year-old young man for the “crime” of revealing the government’s criminal behavior.

dissidentvoice.org...

Put another, even less charitable way: Democratic partisans – liberals – are willing to trade the lives of a couple thousand poor Pakistani tribesman in exchange for a few liberal catnip-filled speeches and NPR tote bags for the underprivileged

This is an incredible article that everyone should share with every liberal progressive dem.
I mean where are the priorities?

Social Security’s great and all I guess, but not exploding little children with cluster bombs – shouldn’t that be at the top of the Liberal Agenda?

Seriously... where are the priorities?

I want to know what every left leaning member here on ATS thinks of this article?
I want to know what opposition do you have to this article???

How can liberals be okay with the status quo and then paint themselves as peace loving people that have open minds and care for others all while allowing this to go on just because the president is a part of the Democratic party?

Can you explain who Ron Paul is? I haven’t heard of him until 1month ago, I hardly think he is presidential materiel, I don’t even think his words are so much that you can even make a thread on him ,if that’s what he is talking about in the op.. Well, now I see why I don’t know who he is , and come to think about it, I don’t want to.
No replies, sorry to the op, it just not worth it. RON PAUL, GAH AND EXTRA GAH!!!!

The tone of OP in this thread is the epitome of thinking one's own flatulence is fragrant.

As a proud liberal I would consider voting for Ron Paul but most certainly NOT at your behest. As much as I share his antiwar stance I loathe any member of the GOP who favors boosting the profits of large corporations and unbridled tax breaks and loopholes for the wealthy over programs that help the needy, infirm and less fortunate.

His pro Corporate agenda causes me great pause (as a small business owner myself) as he favors diverting funds and incentives to fuel greed rather than altruism toward the less privileged and impoverished. As a wise Indian once noted, "Only a foolish man would cut the bottom off of his blanket and sew it on the top and think he has made a bigger blanket."

Gotta run, something's getting odiferous.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Janky Red

 

i know alot of old people geez

and it is mathematically impossible to pay for everything and everyone in this country there is simply not enough money to go around.

i never said anything remotely about denying people who truly deserve care but the governments involvment has had detrimental effects.

and i am sorry to tell you jesus was not a liberal to wit " the lord helps those who help themselves. "

my age has nothing to do with this conversation since i am not the topic of this thread.

thems the brakes.


and there are other places where nukes are just sayin

edit on 28-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

" the lord helps those who help themselves. "

Sure, I just think using this saying to explain away what will happen when millions of elders have no option is not
very reasonable.

Do you know how much a policy for a 72 year old with heart disease runs???

It's not even funny how much that costs

The way you shape this makes it sound like you think such a person is garbage or something because they cannot pay $3,500 a month in premiums,that is hardly not helping themselves.

Stick with me here

Lets say we ended medicare tomorrow

a couple tens of millions of americans lost all medical coverage and could not afford it out of pocket, would such a thing matter to you?

See neo there is a point where I feel I am missing something, the hard fact is these people will really messed, no drama, is there an imperative to preserve their lives?