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.

 

All Of Ron Paul’s Iowa Fox GOP Debate Question & Answers

page: 3
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


America Feeds Ron Paul not Big donor corporations. That is why he will win. Out support is never ending.




posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Lets be honest with ourselves guys. No matter how much truth this guy speaks, he will never be a president, he's too much of a threat. Heck, I'm surprised he's still alive. But anyway, this nomination will be between Perry and Romney, and something about that Perry guy scares the living s*** out of me...



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Old77
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I will get banned for this I am sure but you are a hypocrite to the highest order. I have a hard time accepting the idea another man's idea's of peace and prosperity are "extreme" when you have an alien with head phones in your avatar. Foolish statements...


I have zero idea how an avatar picture makes me a hypocrit.

A little more detail would be grand.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by NightFlight
 




The next problem will be the electronic/computerized voting machines. They will be programmed to elect the PTB's choices. No one can seem to get rid of or want to get rid of these things. I cannot advocate violence but instead of marching on Washington, go down to the warehouse these things are kept and destroy them. Only then will the American people have a legitimate election with paper ballots.


Paper ballots are probably the easiest way to cheat the system. As far as computerized machines, they are the easiest to detect.

People have this misconstrued opinion of computerized systems cheating the system. Give me the source code and I will bust you.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by MrWendal
 


No, by all means...vote for him...please do...that is your right and you should exercise it.


But please do not inflate his chances and please do not come back here after he loses the primary and claim the election was rigged.


That's all I'm saying.


I do not think anyone needs to inflate his chances at all. If you choose to take polls into account I would say his chances loo pretty good all by itself. No inflation needed. That being said, I think most Ron Paul supporters already know he is a long shot based on how his views seem to go against the status quo.

I also do not think you can ever get away from claims of election fraud for a variety of reasons. First and foremost we KNOW election fraud exist based on the 2000 and 2004 elections. During the last election cycle there was plenty of evidence to suggest that during the primaries there was plenty of opportunity for tampering to occur. When you take into account the clear bias by the MSM and the way they purposely downplay, ridicule, and ignore Ron Paul it only stands to reason that people would make such a claim.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Probably because they never heard of Dennis Kucinich.... Ron Paul talks too much of nonsence,on the opposite of Dennis... But no one in US seems to understand what he is talking about...
His famous answer in 2008 on question
U are the only Congresman that voted against Patriot Act,Why?) Because i was the only Congresman who read it!, Makes him the only Sane politician in US for me,mr Ron Paul voted for Patriot Act....anyone ever wondered why??? Or i need to draw for u?!



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 02:59 AM
link   
Here's the thing.

In my opinion, Mr. Paul makes a good showing when it comes to foreign policy; "mind your own business" is a pretty good foundation when dealing with other nations.

However... he clearly does not differ from any of the other candidates on this panel economically. They all have the same (non) ideas - cut everything and pretend magic will happen. Now obviously I have my own ideas as to how plausible that is, but let's talk for a moment about the people who might be voting for the guy - Republicans.

Despite their false protests otherwise, Republicans love them some interventionist foreign policy. They gobbled Reagan up, and he probably shoved our troops into more nations than all 50 years of the Peace Corps combined. They loved Bush Jr. and his outright lying to get us mired into two underfunded, over-budgeted wars. They didn't mind Poppy's made-up interventionism, either, come to think of it. They still say Vietnam was an awesome idea. Ron Paul will not be winning this crowd based on his anti-war, non-interventionalist stances.

Despite the constant raving about "big government," the demonstrable fact is that the size of government balloons under Republicans; because they're in this huge drive to force their preferred culture through as legislation, create regulatory bodies overseeing deregulation, and of course, creating lots of sub-bureaucracies for the pentagon. And again, the republican voting base loves this; they love the idea of lots of shadowy, heavily armed, low-responsibility "agencies" that are 'protecting them from terrorists." They love the notion of htier tax dollars getting flushed down the toilet in lawsuit after lawsuit to try to get science out of sciencebooks, and to get the state firmly imbedded into the uterus. It's like ice cream to them. So how is Ron Paul suppose to win this bunch, when his policies, for the most part, stand in opposition to their values?

Foreign policy, he can't compete among Republicans against the other candidates. Domestic policy, he can't compete among Republicans against the other candidates. Economically, his position is identical to the other candidates. So then why would a Republican vote for him, when they can get the same economic package, but (to their perspective) better foreign and domestic policies from anyone else at the table?

And don't think for a moment a bunch of Liberals are going to rush into his arms. We might agree with some of his stances, but that Freddy Kreuger economic policy of his is a deal-killer.

So he's offering nothing that the Republicans want, basically, and is unlikely to wrangle in any disaffected Democrats. So how does he have a chance at winning the primaries?
edit on 13/8/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 03:03 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


There is more to Ron Paul than most people realize. Ron Paul voted against school vouchers for underprviliged kids. Then he turned around and voted for a tax credit if you send your kid to private school. He basically said if you can afford $13,000 a year for private school we will help you. Other wiseyou are on your own.

Ron Paul isn't as perfect as people like to believe. He has voted for subsidies to corporations and others. However, we have no chance of rocking ourselves out of our current downward spiral unless we elect a man like Ron Paul. I may have to fight his choices in some areas, but that is a small price to pay. I'm changing my registration to republican just so I can give him a vote in the primary race.

I don't agree with him all of the way, but he is our best chance. He wants to truly fight for liberty and I will fight for him.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 03:17 AM
link   
America is too full of War Mongers and Misled Masses to ever elect Ron Paul as President. It would take something huge to change the narrow minds of so many people, and I cant see it happening.

I would love to see someone like ron Paul be President, but until the Global Elites masterplan is fullfilled, someone like him stands no chance.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Ron Paul was predicting the economic collapse while you were still baking in your mothers oven. You sound like you have never heard a darn thing he has said.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeNice81
 


You vote against vouchers because its a damn scary program for kids that does not work, the federal government does not need to decide what food or how much your child gets to eat or consume that is (if they so choose) a state problem AND the parents. If I ever hear one more damn case about a kid who cannot afford lunch yet goes home to watch 350+ cable tv channels I am going to blow my brains out in frustration at how lame people are at life.

And a Tax credit for private schools means the burden on the public school system (which is a joke) is not being stressed to the max like it is with illegal aliens in Texas and other southern states in which illegal's crawl like roaches. Its a good idea to have less government dependence and a tax credit is a good idea. I want one for people who home school as well.
edit on 13-8-2011 by Old77 because: Mispelling



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 



I do not think anyone needs to inflate his chances at all. If you choose to take polls into account I would say his chances loo pretty good all by itself. No inflation needed.


I do take polls into account...but the real polls...not internet polls.

www.realclearpolitics.com...


Ron Paul is not doing well in the polls...he is running 5th...a very distant 5th. He is even losing to Palin...who hasn't even said she is running.


So this is what I mean...even you are inflating his chances by taking internet polls as your source instead of actual scientific polls to look at Ron Paul's chances.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
You can watch the video yourself. Sounds a lot like he is defending Iran's right to a nuclear weapon.


In the interest of having an honest debate, I would ask that you apply a small amount of critical thinking. Lets have a discussion as though we're not a programmed population.

His actual quote said that he can understand their desire to have one considering that they are surrounded by nuclear weapons. He goes on to say that Iran has said that it wants nuclear power, not a bomb, which the CIA seems to confirm. Furthermore, he cites past examples of the US dealing with countries like the USSR which had hundreds of nuclear weapons yet we did not attack them and actually engaged them in dialogue. He makes the case against sanctions as its usually a pre-cursor to war. All of which is clearly said to reiterate an obvious point, that the US should not enter yet another war especially when we have been lied to in the past with regards to WMDs.


Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Again...I'll let you watch it.


And he covers the next point you asked for a source...he is fine with people discriminating because he thinks the "free market" would take care of it

RP clearly says that any objection to the Civil Rights Amendment was in support of property rights not in objecting to the repealing of Jim Crow laws (5:26). Its misleading to equate property rights with racism. We should have the right to decide who comes into our homes. We should also have the right to decide whom we can do business with. And yes there are racist people who will abuse these rights but that does not mean that someone who supports property rights by default supports discrimination, which is the implication here. Very intellectually dishonest.


Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I'm glad you agree with so many of his positions...I'm even more glad that the majority of Americans don't.

I'm confused as to why you think Americans dont or wouldn't agree with his positions. I find it difficult to believe that people are okay with being forced to pay into a bankrupt Social Security system or that working class Americans agree with a failed welfare state which now has a record 42 million people receiving food stamps or that people agree with the concept of endless warfare at the expense of our national debt and a weakened currency, just to name a few.


Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Again...please come back after the primaries...I'm sure there will be enough "The Primary was rigged" threads around.

Are you seriously saying that elections in America are not manipulated?

Firm gives $1 million to pro-Romney group, then dissolves




posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by MrWendal
 



I do not think anyone needs to inflate his chances at all. If you choose to take polls into account I would say his chances loo pretty good all by itself. No inflation needed.


I do take polls into account...but the real polls...not internet polls.

www.realclearpolitics.com...


Ron Paul is not doing well in the polls...he is running 5th...a very distant 5th. He is even losing to Palin...who hasn't even said she is running.


So this is what I mean...even you are inflating his chances by taking internet polls as your source instead of actual scientific polls to look at Ron Paul's chances.


Sarah Palin appeared on Hannity last night and electrified the crowd.
There was a big cheer from the crowd when she said "Well, Cut,Cap & Balance is gone for
now. We need to change to just cut the crap!"



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 




Are you seriously saying that elections in America are not manipulated?

Firm gives $1 million to pro-Romney group, then dissolves


There are entire threads here which debunk that assertion about that donation. It's time you stop promoting a false argument. To promote that disinfo is disengenuous.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 


Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by gladtobehere
 

There are entire threads here which debunk that assertion about that donation. It's time you stop promoting a false argument. To promote that disinfo is disengenuous.

Simply saying that something has been "debunked" is hardly an argument. State your case, provide your source and we can then discuss if there's any merit to your statement.

Stating that there is election fraud in America is a false argument? Sorry if this is rude, but I find that to be an incredibly naive point of view.

Care to comment on the video that I posted?




posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Old77
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Ron Paul was predicting the economic collapse while you were still baking in your mothers oven. You sound like you have never heard a darn thing he has said.


It's not hard to predict something you're striving to create, is it? See, Ron Paul is an adherent of the Austrian / Chicago schools of economics. Are you familiar?

Remember that famous quote during Vietnam, regarding the destruction of Ben Tre? "It became necessary to destroy the town to save it"? That's Austrian economics, in a nutshell. The idea is to utterly and completely destroy a nation economically in the process of "saving it from itself" - i.e., saving it from having a social structure that benefits people who live in the country rather than the transnational financier class.

We're where we are now because of the savage cuts suffered under more "mild" adherents to this school of thought. Now, another belief of this school of thought is that if adherence to the Austrian school of economics causes chaos in a nation, it's not because the theory is bad, it's because the theory is not being applied harshly enough. If drastic cutting sends the majority of your population into poverty, then it's only because you didn't cut ENOUGH, because below that is the magic amount of cutting that will make everyone prosperous.

I know you won't even try to think about what I'm saying, just as I know a stoner won't listen when someone tells them the Grateful Dead really suck at music. But at least try to figure this out.

The big crisis facing our nation is economic.
Every single Republican running has an identical economic plan
i.e., no matter who wins, that is the plan that will go to the general election.
The deck is therefor stacked.
By whom, for whom?



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 04:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Old77
 


School vouchers take part of the money a school would recieve for a student and allows the student to use that money to attend a private school. It opens up the free market in education. It has nothing at all to do with free lunches.

My point was that he voted against the free market in education. Yet he voted to subsidize rich people sending their children to private schools. It contradicts what he says he stands for.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


hey!! the dead don't suck at music.

long live the dead!

maybe some concert footage taken by some messed up people is messed up because they were messed up.

it's not the deads fault!!

edit on 23-8-2011 by fooks because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join