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.

 

Ron Paul Interview on Fox News 10/04

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
It's been a while, but Ron Paul had an interview on a mainstream media network today. They start out talking about Chris Christie's decision to not run for President, since he's the "flavor of the month" as Bill Maher put it.

Then Megyn asks him if his supporters are dissatisfied with his performance, and he explains that they're not because his supporters are much more passionate and confident than other candidates supporters who come and go.

Kelly brings up the latest poll number that has Romney at 25%, Perry and Cain tied at 16%, and Ron Paul in fourth at 11%, and asks him about Perry's fall in the poll numbers.

Next she brings up Awkali's recent death and how Ron Paul called it an impeachable offense, and he talks about how the 5th Amendment was thrown out of the window. Kelly claims that that can be done, and cites an event in 1942 where German spies (one of them being an American citizen) were caught, tried, and electrocuted. The difference there is that they had a trial, and the government has presented no evidence to back up their claims that Awlaki was an enemy combatant.


"This is the way we lose our liberties: incrementally"



edit on 4-10-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post




posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
You I don't know how much Ron Paul will help Americans.
Or if he will actually follow the constitution once elected.
The "elites" will stay the same, your not in a democratic country.
Your just in a box made to believe that your free.
The truman show has been going on in real life for millennium.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by foreshadower99
 


Or if he will actually follow the constitution once elected.
There are no other presidential candidates that talk about, respect, or understand the Constitution more than Ron Paul.


Your just in a box made to believe that your free.
Well if Ron Paul gets elected, hopefully he'll restore the freedoms that have been whittled away over the years.
edit on 4-10-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur


Your just in a box made to believe that your free.
Well if Ron Paul gets elected, hopefully he'll restore the freedoms that have been whittled away over the years.
edit on 4-10-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post


hmm that's the thing "freedoms" and being "free" is different, we have never been free but
it will be hopeful if Ron Paul does in-fact stand behind the constitution because if he does
then I am very sure he will be on the wanted list of the "elites". If Ron Paul can increase
the amount of healthy critical thinkers than I am sure that slavery will be abolished once
and for all without the need of world wide catastrophic event or extraterrestrial help.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by foreshadower99
 


Yes, Ron Paul's plans as president definitely threaten the elite, hence the early media blackout as well as the media repeatedly portraying his campaign and his positions on issues negatively.



posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


I've always felt it's pointless to vote on the basis of any promises candidates make. For one, candidates don't have the security clearance an incumbent president does to even partially understand why 'things' are as screwed up as they always inevitably seem, and need fixing, every time an election year rolls around.
It never surprises me when a new president sits down and can't make good on any promises because, with that new security clearance, oh, so, that's why this is the way it is,

Further, everyone seems to have a knee jerk response to current problems, whenever, and whatever current is at any point in history, always blaming the incumbent president for whatever problems are occurring when often those problems were set in motion from the previous administration, or even the one before that.

Government is an unwieldy beast, and it takes time for any administration to to make cause where later the effect is seen and usually either blamed on, or attributed to the next guy whether plus or minus.

This, of course, is just my opinion.
If your guy can make change for the better, whatever better is, happen, then, best of luck.



new topics

top topics
 
5

log in

join