Ron Paul to Congress: If Debt Is the Problem, Why Do You Want More of It?

reply to post by eNumbra


no action is futile. one man started a revolution in china and ended up overthrowing the whole government because he was late delivering prisoners and knew he would be executed for it.

i await that same spark in america.

reply to post by wcitizen


The military members now better than anyone who is the true patriot and who is looking for the good of USA.

Good to see you again W.

reply to post by hawkiye

Dude you have not done your homework on Ron Paui. he did not pull out of the race he lost the primary and said from the beginning he would not run as an independent or 3rd party....

Sorry that is not how I remember it. I/We (N.C. Farming community) were following him very closely. The Granny Warriors who were campaigning for him live not to far away. However I may have taken his words to "stick to the bitter end" to mean till the actual presidential race was over instead of the primary races.

As I already said to really confuse things the Bilderburg meeting started the first week of June. Ron Paul Suspended campaign on June 12, 2008 just after. On top of that Dan Estulin's warning to Paul was making the internet rounds.

2008 primaries were generally in February. These are the last ones.
MAY 2008
Indiana
North Carolina
Nebraska
Kentucky
Oregon

June 3, 2008
South Dakota
New Mexico

...On March 10, Ron Paul appeared on CNN's American Morning to explain that he has not withdrawn from the race and he will keep campaigning to keep his ideas in the arena, and to fulfill an obligation to his supporters in states that have not yet held primaries.[65]

It's not over; it's certainly winding down, there are a lot less primaries left. Super Tuesday has passed, and McCain has the nominal number. But if you're in a campaign for only gaining power, that's one thing. If you're in a campaign to influence ideas and the future of the country, the campaign is never over.[66]
—Ron Paul, American Morning
en.wikipedia.org...

I voted Ron Paul anyway because I could not stomach McCain or Obama.

Thanks for straightening that out. I STILL planned to vote for Paul again unless they can come up with "Superman" as an option.

S + F.

The more I learn about this man, the more I like him.

I am very thankful that he is making his points part of the Congressional record. Future generations will look back in amazement as to how the American people, unable to resist the establishment brainwashing, rejected someone who could have led the U.S. and the World to a brighter future.

Another speech which very much needed to be documented and thankfully was:

The USA needs to elect Ron Paul but they won't because most Americans are too dumb to realize that he is the only candidate who has their best interests at heart. After all, you guys did elect Bush jr. not once but twice. 'nuff said.

reply to post by Ghost375


" Our debt is so high right now, that we have to do everything we can to fix it. This includes increasing the debt."


Talk about an Oximoron..............Geez..........THINK AGAIN Friend !...........

Originally posted by RUSSO
reply to post by wcitizen

 

The military members now better than anyone who is the true patriot and who is looking for the good of USA.

Good to see you again W.

edit on 22-7-2011 by RUSSO because: (no reason given)

Yes indeed. They are voting with their financial support already.

So nice to see you again too, Russo. :

reply to post by Zanti Misfit




it really is hilarious to fix the debt we must raise it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

only government is that stupid.

So do we default now, with the large spending that's occurring, or do we increase the debt limit for a couple months, work to cut spending, and then default? If default is how it has to be, might as well have the small amount of time to cut spending rather than doing it all at once.

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by Ghost375

 

" Our debt is so high right now, that we have to do everything we can to fix it. This includes increasing the debt."


Talk about an Oximoron..............Geez..........THINK AGAIN Friend !...........

You unfairly misquoted him to suit your needs, nice. What he did say was:

Our debt is so high right now, that we have to do everything we can to fix it. This includes increasing the debt ceiling, and developing a plan to reduced debt in the future.

Developing a plan to reduce spending, and therefore debt, requires time. If you controlled spending and modified taxes, you wouldn't need the drastic debt ceiling increases in the future. Someone make a line graph.

Not to mention that if we did default, that would do nothing but increase our debt further since the interest that has to be paid would go up.

reply to post by gladtobehere

The more I learn about this man, the more I like him.

I am very thankful that he is making his points part of the Congressional record. Future generations will look back in amazement as to how the American people, unable to resist the establishment brainwashing, rejected someone who could have led the U.S. and the World to a brighter future.

I sometimes wonder if the American people ARE rejecting him or if that is just what we are lead to believe. Can you say RIGGED Diebold voting machines???

Hawkiye, got me to do some double checking (I am trainable ) And I ran across some really interesting info.

Information from his 2007-2008 campaign
Ron Paul (as compared to other republicans)
1. received the most money from the armed services of any candidate.
2. had the most support from African-Americans
3. set two fund raising records: the largest single day donation total among Republican candidates and twice receiving the most money received via the Internet in a single day by any presidential candidate in American history.
4. Received most of his contributions from individuals, at ninety-seven percent; compare to other candidates

For the 2008 presidential election, Paul received approximately 20,000 votes.
(Paraphrased from WIKI en.wikipedia.org... )

The Blair-Rockefeller Poll was conducted after the 2010 elections and sampled across the nation, a total of 3,406 individuals who were 18 years and older. This included 1,649 White, Non-Hispanic respondents; 825 African Americans and 932 Hispanic Latinos. The Poll oversampled participants from the southern region of the United States, as well as African Americans and Latinos.

Despite the bias toward minorities and the south, a traditional democratic stronghold, 10.6% of the individuals polled identified themselves as members of the tea party.


If you make the assumption that 50% were "democrats" and 50% "republicans", then roughly 20% of republicans are now also Tea Party. This corresponds to the 9% for Ron Paul and the 9% for Sara Palin I mentioned above. It also explains why the Elite have gone to such trouble to defame and derail the Tea Party.

The Blair-Rockefeller Poll although it comes across as a "Think Tank/University study is very much biased as can be seen in another Article about the same poll.

One of Maxwell’s reports based on the study is titled “Tea Party Distinguished by Racial Views and Fear of the Future,” Not what I would call a "professional title"

Maxwell and political scientists Todd Shields, Pearl Ford Dowe, and Rafael Jimeno of the Diane D. Blair Center of Southern Politics and Society at the University of Arkansas created the Blair-Rockefeller Poll.

This is another report from the same poll that shows the extreme bias of the Ms. Maxwell

Shifting Support for Democratic Party among American Elderly

On the heels of the 2010 mid-term elections, the Diane D. Blair Center of Southern Politics and Society, together with Winthrop Rockefeller Institute, conducted a comprehensive online national poll of political attitudes and behaviors.

....
2012 Battlefield

Overall, the results of this survey indicate that the traditional base of support among older voters that Democrats have relied upon since the partisan realignment following the New Deal continues to weaken. While older voters continue to vote in high percentages, compared to younger cohorts, clear support for the Democratic Party is confined largely to African Americans. While older Hispanics generally favored the Democratic Party, they showed substantial willingness to vote for Republican Senatorial candidates in the 2010 midterm election.

Further, the traditional Democratic support among older Caucasians continues to decline, particularly among older Caucasians living in the South. If these trends continue, the 2012 presidential election will require the Democratic Party to continue to bring young, and often unreliable, voters to the polls. Further, the Democratic Party must continue to make inroads into the growing Latino/Hispanic population. If the GOP is able to maintain its grip on older voters in the South, that tend to not only vote at high rates, but are also overwhelmingly conservative, Republican and willing to support GOP candidates the Democratic presidential campaign strategy will be forced to continue building winning coalitions without the assistance of most of the southern states. With growing populations and over one-third of the Electoral College votes needed to win the Electoral College, losing support among the elderly is an important trend that scholars must continue to monitor....

So much for the study being unbiased, Ms. Maxwell might just as well have made the statistics up out of thin air.

TAX IMPORTS NOT WAGES!

Tax on imports = excise tax, see graph:

reply to post by Darkmask

The USA needs to elect Ron Paul but they won't because most Americans are too dumb to realize that he is the only candidate who has their best interests at heart. After all, you guys did elect Bush jr. not once but twice. 'nuff said.

Yeah but at least some of us learn from our mistakes and the awareness of the Federal Reserve SCAM is spreading like wildfire.

I have been trying to get info out on the Fed and farming issues since 2005 or so and there is a HUGE difference in awareness these days. I do kids entertainment and now a days I run into at least a few "aware" individuals at every single party instead of no interest like I did five years ago.

The economic crash shook a lot of people awake and let me tell you they are TICKED OFF!

reply to post by RUSSO

You know, the more I think about it the more it seems like the American people and our government are like a dysfunctional family where the kids (Government) are abusing the parents (US citizens). The parents give the kids every thing they want including the credit card and the kids max it out doing what they want, when they want and then say that the parents aren't giving them enough so to get their way, they beg, whine and threaten and demand they give them more. All the abuse the parents take and all the grief they suffer, for some reason they never put their foot down and take control of the kids. How many families do you know that are like this. I'm sure we all know or have heard of an example of a family in this situation. Why don't the parents realize they have all of the power and take control of the unruly kids? If you, reader of this post, are in this kind of situation, will you take control of your kids and at what point, or will you let your kids take you to the cleaners? If the answer isn't mind numbingly obvious then surely you get what you deserve.

Simple and logical answers are never taken into consideration. Unfortunately, it happens in the private sector too. The people who make the decisions sometimes are not always the sharpest tools in the tool box.

Well i gotta agree. seems like ron paul is right from what he has been saying

reply to post by Paintshisshieldred


I liike your analogy. I've been thinking about it with a little different spin. Picture this...

The family finances are a mess. The credit cards are maxed out and the home is on the verge of foreclosure...
An immature out of control adolescent is demanding that the credit card limit be raised and that they be driven to the mall for a shopping spree.

The POTUS is playing the overindulgent parent who's attempting to gain the favor of a spoiled brat adolescent (special inerest groups) and is trying to shift the "blame" to the other parent (more fiscally responsible parties).

The overindulgent, irresponsible parent (POTUS) is acting purely out of perceived self interest without thought for the future well being of the adolescent or the family. He is only concerned with "lookin good" and avoiding the irrational wrath of the aolescent..

reply to post by crimvelvet


Sometimes I think USA have become so institutionalized that people can’t imagine life without the huge federal government involved in all aspects of our lives. With freedom comes responsibility, which many Americans fear.

reply to post by Paintshisshieldred

...will you take control of your kids and at what point...

Right now my kids HATE ME.

I just finish catch every single one of them, threw there butts on the ground and held them down while I opened their mouths and hubby shot worming medicine down their throats and gave them a vaccine shot in the butt.

WHy is he asking Congress these questions when he loves to spend the money himself? Ron Paul seems to love debt.

150 million dollars for the state of Texas in EARMARKS he requested for fiscal year 2011.
Hypocrite

Originally posted by David9176
WHy is he asking Congress these questions when he loves to spend the money himself? Ron Paul seems to love debt.

150 million dollars for the state of Texas in EARMARKS he requested for fiscal year 2011.
Hypocrite

From your own thread:

Dr Paul's explanation from your own article:

I think you’re missing the whole point. I have never voted for an earmark. I voted against all appropriation bills. So, this whole thing about earmarks is totally misunderstood. Earmarks is the responsibility of the Congress. We should earmark even more. We should earmark every penny. So, that’s the principle that we have to follow and the — and the responsibility of the Congress. The whole idea that you vote against an earmark, you don’t save a penny. That just goes to the administration and they get to allocate the funds.



I realize that it makes sense to omit this if you're trying to sway minds - but your OP is slanted and unfair. Congressman Ron Paul requested earmarks to appropriately allocate funds should the funding pass, then he voted against spending that money at all. Does this make sense or should I get out the crayons and write up some graphs?