Ron Paul Ambushed On Face The Nation, , page 7

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by MysticPearl

---

It's not really an "ambush" if it's a prepared interview. I swear, Ron Paul's adherants are getting almost as bad as fundie Christians, with how much they get off on pretending to be "oppressed."

Anyway. He remains a very solid idealist on foreign policy; good for him. Unfortunately for him, he continues to either lie or be utterly stupid when it comes to his domestic policy.

"No no, we'll still have parks after I do away with the department of the interior" - Either that's an outright lie, or he's simply utterly clueless of what he's talking about... and I'm tired of giving this guy the benefit of hte doubt with regards to him just not knowing stuff. He could read a damn book, is all I'm sayin'.

Well said...

His domestic policy seems to be: Sink or Swim...with little empathy for the "weakest amongst us", and gives lip service to the "Throw granny under the bus" crowd.

reply to post by romanmel

---

Hmm, actually what I have been noticing, and there is a significant pattern in the way folks who do not support Ron Paul, like the MSM news people, and they just seem to twist and fabricate and spin everything he says, so that it sounds bad.. For example, what you and the person you were responding to are saying illustrates the real twisting of words and remaking his statements.

Excellent job by the way, you both definitely are doing it better than this old washout news guy tried to do with him..fortunately, most people see it for what it really is...

Unless I misunderstood your post..aplogies if that's the case...

reply to post by Ryanssuperman

---

They figured they lost of Mr paul.

2nd

reply to post by romanmel

---

He's essentially a religious fundamentalist; The Invisible Hand is his God, and Milton Friedman is his prophet. Nevermind that these principles have been an abject, and often bloodily violent failure in every other nation they were instituted in, his personal jihad still requires him to try to force it on us, just so that his religion can be "proven right."

reply to post by alienreality

---

As I've explained before... What Ron Paul is proposing - economically at least - is not actually new. It's not different or revolutionary or avant garde or anti-establishment orany of the other BS you get fed to make you believe this wrinkly old twit is edgy and cool and thus deserving of your vote.

His economic plan is identical to Michelle Bachman's. And Newt Gingrich's. And Rick Sanitarium and, goddamn it, all of them. They've all got Grover Norquist's guiding hands up their puppet-cavities and are parroting the exact same old tired free market, invisible hand, cut-taxes-kill-welfare donkey-spooge idea from the diseased mind of Friedrich Hayek that has devastated country after country around the world since 1965, all because Hayek was a narcissist with a grudge against Keynes.

Basically? Look at Greece. See that Austerity package being foisted on those people? The absolute gutting of services to the Greek People to pay off the debts of collusion between Greek Bankers and Greek governance, none of whom are paying off a single drachma from their personal accounts? That's what Ron Paul wants us to impose on ourselves. He wants businesses liberated from dues and regulations, and we the people will be footing their bills for them to make up the difference.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

---

I watched an interesting documentary on victorian British bankers last night. What I found quite interesting was that these Bankers, the Lord Rothschilds of the world, actually shared the same philosophies as those who support Ron Paul. When LLoyd George brought in the pension for the elderly and an end to the workhouses through the use of taxation. Lord Rothschild, went mad, Claiming that no one should be forced to pay tax, giving should be a voluntary action and that charity instead of taxation should provide services for the poor.

It seems some want to take us back to this Victorian era, where us lowly folk doff our caps to the rich folk.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

---

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
What Ron Paul is proposing - economically at least - is not actually new.

You are correct in that all of the other candidates are regurgitating Ron Paul's ideals but other than stating it, you fail to show us where or how his ideals on solving our economic policies aren't "new" or different.

Allow me to enlighten you with regards to Greece.

The Greek government borrowed themselves into oblivion. Unable to service their debt, they did what any insane group of people would do: borrow MORE money and plunge the country into FURTHER debt. Shockingly, they were unable to support this additional debt burden. How strange that the solution to a debt crisis is NOT MORE DEBT. Sound the least bit familiar?

Youre also correct in saying that the International banksters colluded with the corrupt politicians in Greece to impose "austerity", guaranteeing the repayment of bank loans on the backs of the Greek people. However, you are absolutely WRONG in saying that this is in anyway similar to Ron Paul's proposals.

Bush, then Obama signed TARPS 1, 2 and 3. These funds guaranteed that the banks would not fail. Who got stuck with the bill, you guessed it, we did. Exactly like Greece, the banksters have been guaranteed payment.

Ron Paul said NO to the bank bailouts under Obama AND under Bush. Ron Paul suggested that we NOT payback the banksters. Ron Paul is advocating that the American people should NOT be liable for our government's insane debt burden.

And as Paul himself commented recently: "We owe, like, $1.6 trillion because the Federal Reserve bought that debt, so we have to work hard to pay the interest to the Federal Reserve," Paul said. "We don't, I mean, they're nobody; why do we have to pay them off?"

www.wnd.com...

As much as you are dying to maintain a failed welfare state, I've got some really terrible news for you. Much like the warfare state, it is not sustainable. Those who are working and who pay taxes and who are trying to prevent the loss of what little they have left, refuse to support a hundred years of failed government programs which have destroyed this nation.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

---

However, I believe most people unfairly criticize Ron Paul because they have been deceived for so long and simply do not expect any thing different from any other politician. I understand your concern. You are justified in that. You do not have to agree with Ron Paul on everything. Not even "Paulites" agree with him on everything. However, you can still disagree all you want, but the reason that we are in this mess is because of two things that Ron Paul has been speaking about for the past 25 years. 1) Our foreign policy 2) Federal Reserve monetary policy. These two issues are the main reason you have seen the decline in prosperity throughout America for the past 40 years and will continue to see more decline if continued.

The only trap we and they are in is one directly caused by Federal Reserve manipulation of interest rates, and massive federal debt -- both of which apparently you'd like more of.

There's a reason folks like you were blindsided by the housing crisis and crash of '08, while economists like Peter Schiff and Ron Paul predicted exactly why and how it would occur.

In reality your only concern is social safety nets, i assume you are on welfare or have been. No doubt part of the 99% that want hand outs and more government.

My concern is saving the country..

reply to post by seabag

---

How would ending over seas operations hurt our national security?
If anything it would make us safer.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by seabag

---

How would ending over seas operations hurt our national security?
If anything it would make us safer.

As I’ve stated before, Ron Paul does a great job on the economy and other domestic issues but he loses me when it comes to national security and defense.

For those of you who support Ron Paul’s approach to national defense, you had to have reevaluated your position after the debate last night. I’m paraphrasing here but Paul basically suggested we deal with killers and terrorists through our legal system. He then used Timothy McVeigh as a shining example. He was promptly schooled by Newt Gingrich when Newt accurately pointed out that the Timothy McVeigh situation was an absolute FAILURE because 168 Americans DIED! Had we been able to use the tactics we have today (which Paul opposes) we would have prevented those needless deaths. Under a Paul administration, those things will happen again, and again, and again because he holds civil liberties much higher than a common sense defense policy.

I agree that we should finish the job in Iraq and Afghanistan and get the heck out.

I also agree that we should stop poking our collective nose into the business of other nations. That alone will help our security.

However, if we follow Ron Paul’s form of national defense, I believe more Americans will die here in America because he will take away all of the means we use to uncover these plots. IMO we cannot afford to have a reactive strategy while terrorists are actively seeking small, briefcase sized nuclear devices.

We must be proactive…..and YES, even if it means we give up SOME civil liberties.

I’d rather be patted down at the airport than dead.

I’d rather have my electronic transmissions monitored than be dead.

reply to post by JibbyJedi

---

Yeah i'm down with the red.....maybe a dual one like Grievous?

reply to post by seabag

---

How do we finish the job in Iraq and Afghanistan? What is there to finish?
We have done enough. It's over. There is no job to finish. That's like saying we should have finished the job in Vietnam.

Ok.. I'm blown away by what you said at the end.
We must be proactive even if it means giving up some civil liberties????
You are crazy. You don't speak for anyone, but yourself. You are like a fascists model citizen. NEVER give up civil liberties under any circumstance. We are fools for changing anything after attacks. We should have continued on as if nothing ever happened. All that has changed for us is for the worse and we are in no more and no less danger than we were before. That is such a foolish thing to say.

You would rather be patted down at the airport than dead? Haha man, I am sorry you have a lot to learn. I feel for you really because you apparently have to start over on your enter ideology. From the ground up. You think being patted down at the airport keeps you alive? Lol. Man seriously, your post is the far and away the most laughable post I have seen on ATS to date. I can't get over it. It's like if Goebbels retarded half brother took over as the head of propaganda. You really think those things are making you safer? Lol.

reply to post by ker2010

---

It would seem very likely that she/he is either on some type of government support system or works for the government which means she is guaranteed a tax payer funded retirement.

No one wants to be on welfare. There was a time when people wanted to be self sufficient and productive until the government got involved. They have in-fact created a "welfare state". What may have started out as a helping hand has now turned into an attitude of entitlement and "gimme gimme gimme".

Once again, government has failed us.

Had the government not destroyed our economy, destroyed the value of our dollar and absorbed so much of our money in taxes, people may actually be able to help themselves.

reply to post by MysticPearl

---

Ron Paul is going to be the spoiler for the democrats. He'll take away just enough votes to put some other idiot republican in office.

reply to post by seabag

---

The issue has never been over surveillance.

The issue, and I wish RP had pointed this out last night as he has done in the past, is warrant-less spying without any oversight.

Theres never a legitimate reason for the government to spy on its citizens without probable cause or a subpoena or some kind of 3rd party oversight. Never. This isn't even debatable.

The government wants to spy on a "bad guy", no problem. Goto a FISA type court, state your case, show your evidence and there you go.

As usual, the government and its minions will blur the discussion, make it about "safety and terrorism" when in fact its about accountablility and oversight, something our government hates.

And everyone knows, we can trust our loving government.

They would never spy on war protesters or Birthers or Truthers or those who dont buy into climate change, least of all a Congressman who threatens the entire system.

Starts at 3:30

www.youtube.com...

A Really Sad Picture That I Saw Today, Left Me Speechless
  Posted 12 days ago with 148 member flags

Fact Check: First Lady\'s False Fairy Tale of Struggle
  Posted 6 days ago with 81 member flags

Mitt Romney Accidentally Confronts A Gay Veteran; Awesomeness Ensues
  Posted 6 days ago with 72 member flags

Coal miners say they were forced to attend Romney event and donate
  Posted 14 days ago with 71 member flags

Stephen King\'s Message
  Posted 10 days ago with 71 member flags

The United States has collapsed economically, socially, politically, legally, constitutionally, and
  Posted 15 days ago with 44 member flags

A Perfect Example Of How America Is Turning Into A Police State? Look At Tampa Bay
  Posted 18 days ago with 41 member flags

Paul Ryan Exposes Elite Agenda, "Shut Up" Says Banker
  Posted 10 days ago with 40 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: