It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Tonosama
But he did inherit all of this #. There's no getting around that logic.
The difference is that the puppet masters got to him. Do you really think that TPTB would allow a president to follow his agenda to the fullest?
The last president to try was JFK and look what happened to him.
Originally posted by arbitrarygeneraiist
reply to post by Praetorius
But really, what certainty or guarantee is there that if elected Ron Paul wouldn't just be more of the same? What if he's pressured into repeating the same old same old?.
Originally posted by masterp
Sometimes you people make me believe you have gotten a divorce from reality. Do you really believe that a single human can bring the troops home, for example? that's absurd. Or close Guadanamo? or eliminate excessive spending? or fix th healthcare system? or go against Wall Street or the banking system?
As soon as a man would try to do all those things, he would be murdered. So, if Ron Paul would become president, he would quickly succumb to TPTB, that do not include the president, of course.
Obama made a lot of promises before he got elected, but they won't let him implement them. If he tries to do anything, he will be popped as quickly as you can say "cheese". Let's not forget that Obama was publically threatened to be killed by Hillary Clinton, even if that was presented only as a slip of the tongue by the press.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
This article assumes that Paul would be able to get his agenda passed. The President is not a King or Dictator. They don't get in there and start making their own rules. Anyone who thinks Paul (or ANY president of their choice) is going to become president and start changing things in Washington, is a bit naive and has a surprise coming.
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
You said if Obama was handpicked then Ron Paul must be too.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
If Obama was hand-picked, then Ron Paul would be hand-picked, too, right?
Why would he be any different?
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
But if I've misunderstood something, maybe you can explain it to me...
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
Hand picking just means these are the two candidates that will be funded and promoted by corporate interests and the corporate owned media.
Originally posted by airspoon
It wasn;t long ago when the media would ignore him all together or simply spin his message into something that its not, such as Fox News trying to call him a terrorist.
Originally posted by masterp
Let's not forget that Obama was publically threatened to be killed by Hillary Clinton, even if that was presented only as a slip of the tongue by the press.
"My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it."
Originally posted by airspoon
afterword - I often hear people say that they didn't vote for Paul because there was no chance that he would win and they didn't want to "throw away" a vote. That is such a sad thing to hear because voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I supported and was going to vote for Paul in 2008 until he wilted like hot lettuce. I have concerns about his ability to stand strong against the PTB. (do you?)
Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
Ron Paul also hasn't been commander in chief following someone as disastrous as Bush, leaving 2 wars, renditions and CIA torture prisons spread around the world, and a love-hate quasi alliance with Pakistan.
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.
Originally posted by Praetorius
Just stay in and keep losing? The deck was stacked against him from the start with the media hatchet jobs and the level of crap that took places in the earliest, most influence, elections. How would he have fought?
Originally posted by boondock-saint
the opt out version will NOT work.
Originally posted by Janky Red
I will not vote for him because he will allow for corporations to dictate private law, through passivity in regards to
handling corporate intent and procurement of governmental prowess.
He will never achieve smaller government because they will assume the role of government and lobby government. There is a huge logic hole you and Paul are missing...
Originally posted by Janky Red
How can you expect to be more free, when you strive to privatize everything, therefore making everything exclusive???
Originally posted by Janky Red
I would not opt out, many people I know would stay in there because it serves a purpose in this society.
My Republican grandparents needed that money and they experienced what good that did for them.