Why is everyone on the Ron Paul bandwagon?

Originally posted by 27jd
Ron Paul does NOT want to get rid of the CIA. He does however want them to stop spying on U.S. citizens, and gain intel on foreign threats. In the event of trouble with an asymmetric threat, the letters of marque could be enacted, giving the Constitutional authority to target rag tag criminals that threaten us.

Well I'd be interested to know where that comes from, because from all I've seen and read it's "eliminate" and "take out" the CIA. He even said as much in one of the debates along with Homeland Security and the IRS.

reply to post by KrazyJethro


Here ya go...

Paul would severely reduce the role of the CIA; reducing its functions to intelligence-gathering. He would eliminate operations like overthrowing foreign governments and assassinations. He says this activity is kept secret even from Congress and “leads to trouble.” He also commented, “We have every right in the world to know something about intelligence gathering, but we have to have intelligent people interpreting this information.”
ronpaulrally.org...

Then, once intel is gathered on a threat and the evidence presented to Congress, the letters of marque could be used to take out the threat...

The Founding Fathers of the United States included a passage in the Constitution, which allowed for a solution to problems like the ones the US faced after the attacks on 9/11. Rather than invading multiple countries in search of a ragtag crew of air pirates, Letters of Marque and Reprisal would have allowed for the President to pursue the individuals responsible for the attack in a precise manner.
www.unelected.org...

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Well I'd be interested to know where that comes from, because from all I've seen and read it's "eliminate" and "take out" the CIA.

He never said eliminate them, here is the Ron Paul quote about taking them out...

"There's been a coup - have you heard? It's the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything! They run the military .. and they're every bit as secretive as the Federal Reserve. And yet, think of the harm they have done since they were established at the end of World War II. They are a government unto themselves. They're in businesses, in drug businesses, they take out dictators... We need to take out the CIA!"

It was a play on words after the "take out dictators" part. He meant take them out of their unintended position of control and corruption, and get them back on track with their original purpose. He understands the need for intel gathering, and he has never advocated eliminating the CIA...

The man himself is frankly irrelevant.

Its the ideas he promotes: Peace and Freedom that inspire us.

And I love when the naive among us say that those who believe that the Federal government is an ineffective delivery platform for things like medical care (Medicare/Medicaid), public pensions (social security), and indigent assistance (welfare, unemployment, food stamps) we are against helping our more vulnerable citizens.

By running these programs the Federal government has made them unsustainable. While some services may be received over the intermediae term, over the long term the system will eventually collapse hurting or destroying all of us. If these services were delivered more locally, then at least when these benefits became out of alignment with what is sustainable economically it wouldn't threaten the whole nation. And who knows, in many places the end results for those in need would be better as well.

Peace and freedom should not be radical concepts.

Originally posted by tHEpROGRESSIVE
Ron Paul is gross. At least Obama cares about people and is trying to give them jobs. Ron Paul wants to cut all kind of government departments and just leave people to die on their own. It is ridiculous!

sounds like someone who depends on welfare.... americans need to grow up, quit being so damn pitiful, stop relying on big government to spoon feed you and take care of yourselves.

reply to post by ker2010

The only dumb and easy manipulated are people like you who have probably voted many times in the past and see were we are now?

So, you're saying that you are going to NOT vote Ron Paul into the presidency?

How exactly is that supposed to work? Just magically by your lack of voter participation they are going to just give the presidency to Ron Paul, a person who has yet to be at the top of his own party, not to mention has even though ran for the presidency several times, has yet to even grab the nomination.

I'll wager my voter participation versus your political apathy that voting for a person will get that person elected 100% more often than not voting for anyone at all.

Originally posted by rudeboyrave
reply to post by bacci0909

 

explain why you think this?

Explain what you think it is I should explain that I think.. ?
2nd

Originally posted by ker2010

Originally posted by dreamseeker
reply to post by ker2010

 

Educate? LOL. I am the unenlightened one? LOL. Republicans are the ones who need to be enlightened; they are dinosaurs. The problem is Ron Paul must agree with a good percent of what the Republicans stand for or he would have ran on the democratic ticket!

Yep because everything you have said about RP has been countered but you will not listen to reason.

Now you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Your going to need super powers to convince a card carrying liberal they might be wrong. I will give you credit, you tried where I would have given up. All dreamseeker wants to hear is they are right and you are wrong....there is no debate.

As for why RP doesn't run independent and drop the republicans its because our presidential debates are dominated by the two parties a campaign outside the system wont garner the attention it needs to win.

Just remember people love and root for an underdog, especially an underdog who is treated unfairly by a system they are becoming increasingly fed up with.

Originally posted by 27jd
He never said eliminate them, here is the Ron Paul quote about taking them out...

Fair enough, on closer inspection those were the views of Libertarian Ron Paul that somehow have gotten run around these days.

My mistake and I'm glad you corrected me.

reply to post by ker2010

As for why RP doesn't run independent and drop the republicans its because our presidential debates are dominated by the two parties a campaign outside the system wont garner the attention it needs to win.

Wrong. Ron Paul has been a lifelong Republican, and he won't turn his back on his party. He holds the ideals and the ideology of the GOP, and that's why he seeks the GOP nomination, not because being independent would mean he would lose, he does a good enough job being a loser without being an independent.

Just remember people love and root for an underdog, especially an underdog who is treated unfairly by a system they are becoming increasingly fed up with.

Yes, people like to root for the underdog, but Ron Paul isn't an underdog, he's just a loser. There is a difference between betting on a long shot and throwing your money away on a lame horse. Ron Paul is a lame horse if there ever was on in this race.

Originally posted by jam321
Ron Paul has already said he would do this, he would do that etc. But until he convinces me how he is going to get Congress to approve his list of "what I'm going to do" I just see him as another politician promising the world.

It's not about that! It's about what he can stop with a veto pen, even if congress won't back him, he won't back congresses unconstitutional laws.

Please think outside of the box.

Originally posted by HauntWok


Yes, people like to root for the underdog, but Ron Paul isn't an underdog, he's just a loser. There is a difference between betting on a long shot and throwing your money away on a lame horse. Ron Paul is a lame horse if there ever was on in this race.

I didn't realize I won anything by voting for someone that wins, unless the person I voted for is someone who will do good for the country.

This whole concept of voting for someone because they will "probably win" has to be the most naive concept I've ever heard of, and the sad thing is you are not the first person I have heard it from. Why not just let the government automatically vote for me then?

Originally posted by WP4YT

Originally posted by HauntWok


Yes, people like to root for the underdog, but Ron Paul isn't an underdog, he's just a loser. There is a difference between betting on a long shot and throwing your money away on a lame horse. Ron Paul is a lame horse if there ever was on in this race.

I didn't realize I won anything by voting for someone that wins, unless the person I voted for is someone who will do good for the country.

This whole concept of voting for someone because they will "probably win" has to be the most naive concept I've ever heard of, and the sad thing is you are not the first person I have heard it from. Why not just let the government automatically vote for me then?

Yea its a funny thing isn't it, how "unelectable" he is and at the same time the most electable in the whole lot of em.

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by ker2010

 

As for why RP doesn't run independent and drop the republicans its because our presidential debates are dominated by the two parties a campaign outside the system wont garner the attention it needs to win.

Wrong. Ron Paul has been a lifelong Republican, and he won't turn his back on his party. He holds the ideals and the ideology of the GOP, and that's why he seeks the GOP nomination, not because being independent would mean he would lose, he does a good enough job being a loser without being an independent.

Just remember people love and root for an underdog, especially an underdog who is treated unfairly by a system they are becoming increasingly fed up with.

Yes, people like to root for the underdog, but Ron Paul isn't an underdog, he's just a loser. There is a difference between betting on a long shot and throwing your money away on a lame horse. Ron Paul is a lame horse if there ever was on in this race.

Wow... so uhm.. yeah. wow. This is arguing at its finest huh? *facepalm*

reply to post by muse7


Yes, but common folks don't have the means (specially in the states) to make a change by themselves so they submit to the most reasonable candidate.

Making a change would imply understanding peoples needs, having a clear and concise set of principles (not what you see in ows) and then activism, propaganda, public debates, etc.

It is a lot of work and nowadays few idealist are left, so those who actually put up the work are not always to be trusted...

reply to post by scoobdude


A presidential candidate is not a horse and you vote not based in your thoughts on his result but based on if his convictions and actions are bening toward you or adverse.

What kind of nonsense is that?


From that perspective you'd rather be robbed your bank vault than your wallet, because the bank robber is more of a "winner" than the snatcher


"only two things are infinite the universe and human stupidity and i'm not sure about the former"

reply to post by dadgad


very interesting. i watched it twice, had to post it on my facebook, even tho i think no one will see it. lol.

some people should get this brochure
www.ronpaulproducts.com...

As President, Ron Paul will:

Bring our troops home
Secure our borders
End the Income Tax
Phase out the IRS
Repeal Obama Care
Repeal Patriot Act
End the Fed
Balance the Budget
Fix Health Care
Return power to the State (9th & 10th Amendment)

In 12 terms as a united states congressman Ron Paul has never voted:

to Raise Taxes
for an Unbalanced Budget
to Raise Congressional pay
to Restrict Gun Ownership
to Regulate Internet
for the Iraq war
for Any Bailout
to Increase the Power of the Executive branch

Federal Reserve:
Only Congress has the authority to coin money, not the Federal Reserve (FED). Ron Pail wants to reestablish Congressional authority over money. Established in 1913, the FED is an unconstitutional and, secretive system, controlled by private bankers. The FED creates money out of thin air to enable unsustainable foreign spending and the bailing out of Wall Street mega-corporations deemed too big to fail. The FED interferes with free markets.
When the FED increases the money printing, inflation occurs. |This leads to rising prices on everyday things like food, gas, clothing , prescription drugs, energy, and more.

Taxes:
Ron Paul would balance the budget, cut wasteful spending, eliminate unnecessary federal government agencies, end the income, death and capital gains tax - which would allow a phasing out of the IRS by scaling back federal spending to 2000 levels. The primary means of financing government operations would be by excise taxes and non-protectionist tariffs. This will allow Americans to keep their money, resulting in a booming economy.

War in Middle-east
The wars allows huge corporate profits through mostly lucrative no-bid contracts with the military while these same corporate interests in partnership with government keeps American citizens living in fear, allowing even deeper violations of our personal liberties. Since 2002 the war has cost 6,300 Americans lives, and an estimated 135,000 civilians.[6][7] It has cost the American tax payer roughly $1.3 Trillion - a total cost of $720 Million per
day.Ron Paul would implement a foreign policy that would bring the troops home.

Ron Paul facts:

Predicted the current economic collapse
Unlike most political candidates, Paul receives the overwhelming majority of his campaign contributions from individuals
Ron Paul is a military veteran who procures lost or un-received medals for war veterans and holds dozens of medal ceremonies annually
Is a graduate of Gettysburg College and Duke University School of Medicine
An expert on Free Market economics
The most-searched candidate on YouTube, Facebook, Meetup, Google, etc.
Ron Paul is voted 1st in almost every post-debate poll and grassroots straw poll
Termed the “Champion of the Constitution”
Endorses Free Trade but rejecting membership in NAFTA and the World Trade Organization, as “managed trade”
Stated that “Israel is our close friend” and that it is not the place of the United States to “dictate how Israel runs her affairs”
Refuses the lucrative congressional pension program.
Returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. Treasury every year
As a physician, routinely lowered fees or worked for free and refused to accept Medicaid or Medicare payments
The only candidate not owned by special interest, big business, banks, and large corporations

compare the candidates on youtube here

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by muse7
In my opinion he's no different than all of the previous presidents that promised "Change" and to do things different.

Nothing is going to change, absolutely nothing. The president first needs to support of congress to get things done. What makes you all so sure that he's going to come in and change everything?

Please remember that this man is still a politician.

The only way we will change things is when WE the people take action and get things done, instead of depending on other people to bring the "change" that we so badly want.

No president can do it alone. He needs to involve the public in order for them to champion change by forcing their regional representatives. As president of change, he will face overwhelming resistance...very strategic resistance but he has a trump card. He commands the press to release public announcement petitioning the public to support radical changes against the rich elitists. I think presidents loose sight of this power after taking office as they get beaten down by the BS.