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.

 

What Would Ron Paul Do On His 1st Day As President?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
In this short interview, Ron Paul discusses what he would do starting from Day 1 as president. He talks about bringing our troops home which would help to cut spending severly, and also would stimulate the economy because there are that many more people spending money. Then he talks about working on our debt, however something that's been accumulated over decades can't be erased in one day.

The interviewer tries to throw a curve-ball by asking him what would he do if Iran had a nuclear weapon, and he has a great answer: "Nothing". He's then asked what he would do if Iran planned to use it on Israel, and he once again says nothing because Israel is capable of defending themselves and we don't need to intervene.





posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
call for the arrest of George Bush and Dick Chenney.... kidiing



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by adam76
call for the arrest of George Bush and Dick Chenney.... kidiing


You are not kidding



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   
I think this thread would then belong in the World War 3 forum after that haha.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
What Would Ron Paul Do On His 1st Day As President?

He would go into that closed-meeting, come out a few hours later looking much older and then go on to *not deviate much from the path Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama have been following... Look, you all should know by now that one man won't change the course when the crew behind the scenes remains the same.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 



He would go into that closed-meeting, come out a few hours later looking much older and then go on to *not deviate much from the path Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama have been following... Look, you all should know by now that one man won't change the course when the crew behind the scenes remains the same.
Ron Paul isn't your run of the mill sell-out politician. He has stood by his views for 30 years and he doesn't change his stance on issues to gain support as his Congressional voting record shows. He looks out for the people and wants to uphold the Constitution, I can't say the same for the other presidential candidates.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


Doesn't matter. Same Congress, Same Secretaries, Same Advisers - unless Paul ousts everyone in D.C. and starts over - his *one stand won't be enough.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 




Doesn't matter. Same Congress, Same Secretaries, Same Advisers - unless Paul ousts everyone in D.C. and starts over - his *one stand won't be enough.
If he's elected, we'll see how things play out. I don't think it's fair to assume he'll just be another Fail, because with that logic all future presidents/presidential candidates won't be able to do anything and it's pointless to even care.

Drop that apathy and vote for Ron Paul!
edit on 26-8-2011 by TupacShakur because: to edit my post



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


I'm not apathetic and to throw that out now makes it apparent that you are not looking closely at what I'm saying, which is becoming more and more typical.

See what you want, but not what is there...

I will spell it out. One man will not change anything in D.C. to do that, there must be a collective shift which may be happening, or it may not be. I lean towards the belief that most people want someone else to do for them, that which they do not want to *really do for themselves. Hence, the pinning of hopes on Obama to Change things and now again with Paul (or rather, yet another election with Paul).

It doesn't matter what Paul stands for, if everything else in D.C. stays the same.
Get the point?


edit on 26-8-2011 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 




I'm not apathetic and to throw that out now makes it apparent that you are not looking closely at what I'm saying, which is becoming more and more typical.

I interpreted that as apathy because you basically said that nobody can make any actual serious change as president. How would you describe your mentality if not apathetic? Hopeless? Pessimistic? Rational?


I will spell it out. One man will not change anything in D.C. to do that, there must be a collective shift which may be happening, or it may not be. I lean towards the belief that people want someone else to do for them, that which they do not want to *really do for themselves. Hence, the pinning of hopes on Obama to Change things and now again with Paul (or rather, yet another election with Paul).

Get the point?
Yes I got your point the first time you said it, but I think he will be able to accomplish lots of the things he talks about. Ending the wars? As far as I know you only need Congressional approval to enter wars. Ending the Drug War? I think that'll be an easy one. Auditing the Fed? I can't imagine the majority of Congress being against that. Social Security and Health Care reform? IMO that will probably be the toughest to get going. I could be wrong about some of those things, but just believing that he won't be able to get the ball rolling is just giving up before the fight even starts.
edit on 26-8-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 

Cautiously Optimistic rears its head every now and again, but Cynical is a better descriptor of my attitude towards Politicians (all of them). I prefer the wait and see approach, I guess.



edit on 26-8-2011 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 



I prefer the wait and see approach, I guess.
So operating under assumption that all of the 2012 presidential candidates actually can do most if not all of the things that they claim (might not be true, but just pretend), I think Ron Paul would be the most beneficial to this country by a wide margin.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi

Doesn't matter. Same Congress, Same Secretaries, Same Advisers - unless Paul ousts everyone in D.C. and starts over - his *one stand won't be enough.


I know he wont do this, but he should declare martial law, and with the help of the military arrest most of our so called representatives on the federal level, along with anyone who played a part in the housing bubble, wall street bankers, corporations who shipped jobs to china.

Arrest them on charges of treason, and since treason is punishable by death you can guess the rest.

To save the Constitution, it needs to be put into an induced coma, only then can we perform the multiple surgeries needed to restore it back to health.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Go on holiday



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi
What Would Ron Paul Do On His 1st Day As President?

He would go into that closed-meeting, come out a few hours later looking much older and then go on to *not deviate much from the path Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama have been following... Look, you all should know by now that one man won't change the course when the crew behind the scenes remains the same.


But it all starts with one man...

The way I see it, a good leader brings people together to accomplish the task(s) at hand.

Ron Paul brings people together...

As cheesy at it sounds, don't give up hope just yet.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
and then the real people in charge tell the temp he needs to keep troops over there to protect the stargate, and the ball keeps rolling.....



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
and then the real people in charge tell the temp he needs to keep troops over there to protect the stargate, and the ball keeps rolling.....


That we'll just have to wait and see.

But this I know... Ron Paul has more integrity then any politician I've ever seen.

For that he not only gets my support but my time and my money.

It's time for some "real" change.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


What Would Ron Paul Do On His 1st Day As President?

Crap his pants when he realized what he signed up for and acknowledge that he has minimal support in the House and Senate to implement any of his policies.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 



Ron Paul isn't your run of the mill sell-out politician. He has stood by his views for 30 years and he doesn't change his stance on issues to gain support as his Congressional voting record shows. He looks out for the people and wants to uphold the Constitution, I can't say the same for the other presidential candidates.


Ron Paul won many of his Congressional elections with less than 100K votes. His 2010 vote count was actually less than 40K. There's a big difference between that and the average 65 million needed to win the WH.

Just sayin...



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join