Ron Paul: Election shows U.S. 'far gone'

page: 1
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+2 more 
posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   




Rep. Ron Paul, whose maverick presidential bids shook the GOP, said in the wake of this week's elections that the country has already veered over the fiscal cliff and he sees no chance of righting ship in a country where too many people are dependent on government. "We're so far gone. We're over the cliff," the Texas Republican told Bloomberg Television's "In the Loop" program. "We cannot get enough people in Congress in the next 5-10 years who will do wise things. Mr. Paul, who is retiring after 12 terms in the House, said voters on Tuesday rejected Mitt Romney because he had opposed the government bailout of General Motors and Chrysler. "The people in the Midwest voted against him: 'Oh, we have to be taken care of!' So that vote was sort of like what we are laughing at in Greece," Mr. Paul said. "People do not want anything cut," he said. "They want all the bailouts to come. They want the Fed to keep printing the money. And they don't believe that we've gone off the cliff or are close to going off the cliff. They think we can patch it over, that we can somehow come up with some magic solution. But you can't have a budgetary solution if you don't change what the role of government should be. As long as you think we have to police the world and run this welfare state, all we are going to argue about is who will get the loot."

Quoted from Washington Times

Im REALLY concerned about where America is headed.
Some may think that what happens in America doesn't affect them, truth is, it affects the entire world.

Consider that we are all on a massive island, its basically true but on a larger scale.
I wish we could escape the stupidity.
edit on 8-11-2012 by SageBeno because: Washington Times Link




posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   
your right...it does matter to the whole world.....thats why 99% of the world are happy obama won


its so easy for ron paul to be the next president

all he needs is a positive campaign.....no need for typical republican trash talk...or to be right wing.....

it would be the easiest campaign...unless they complicated it by being negative and critising the president.

use the "change" campaign blueprint...in 4 yrs time, it will work


peace
edit on 8-11-2012 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by SageBeno
 


Ron and Rand are watered down like the rest of them. Their supporters turned them into instant millionaires, so they should do us all a favor and both retire. It'll give them plenty of time to catch up on the 9/11's.


This was posted earlier today:


You've all been witness to an organized diversion - accumulating hard assets with little or no effort involved. Label it banking, monarchy, oligarchy, divide and conquer... It doesn't matter at this point. The trickery doesn't work, nor will holding onto its spoils.

Game Over Man.
edit on 8-11-2012 by Americanist because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by SageBeno
 


Ron Paul wouldve been good for the US but the only way hell become a leader here is if he gets on the really good side of some really top brass military leaders and plots a coupe



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
To be fair I don't think Paul can really complain about how the election went. He had the opportunity to endorse a candidate. He opted not to. If he thought someone could have run the country better than someone else he should have said so. He may be right, but if that's the case then he should have definitely spoken up earlier as his endorsement could have caused things to turn out differently.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
you can complain about ron paul...playing background

but what about hilary clinton....she dissapeared completely....never helped obama at all.....

obama should make romney secretary of state lol...



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Yup.

Pretty much sums it up. "We need to cut spending, but don't you dare take my Obama cash". Or "We need to cut spending, but not on the military where 3/4 of all our budget goes".

Whatever, just sit back and laugh when they all come crying for help. They'll get what they wanted, but they're not going to like it when they do.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
So many people today do not want to accept personal responsibility. I would have voted for Paul in a heartbeat if the republican party and the media had not left him out of the loop.
He is right, by the time this term is over it will be too late. Even before the mid-terms it will be too late.
I am not sure what else, if anything, can be done.
Is all that's left is to accept it? Hello USSA?
Quad
edit on 8-11-2012 by Quadrivium because: spelling



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
To be fair I don't think Paul can really complain about how the election went. He had the opportunity to endorse a candidate. He opted not to. If he thought someone could have run the country better than someone else he should have said so. He may be right, but if that's the case then he should have definitely spoken up earlier as his endorsement could have caused things to turn out differently.


He did speak up and say who he thought could run the country the best...that's why he ran for President.

None of the other available choices could have run the country better than him, why would he endorse someone that he knows is going to run the country off of the fiscal cliff? He has every right to voice his opinion now, after all, he is the only one whose opinion has been constantly correct when it comes to the economy.
edit on 8-11-2012 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 





but not on the military where 3/4 of all our budget goes".


Yep.. Im not a complete pacifist but 700 billion a year is freaking ridiculous.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by SageBeno
Mr. Paul said. "People do not want anything cut," he said. "They want all the bailouts to come. They want the Fed to keep printing the money. And they don't believe that we've gone off the cliff or are close to going off the cliff. They think we can patch it over, that we can somehow come up with some magic solution.


Hate to argue with Ron Paul but he's wrong.
People don't think they can patch it over.

They know we are past the point of no return.

They simply don't care as long as everybody gets screwed together.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Quadrivium
 





He is right, by the time this term is over it will be too late.


And in my mind this is the plan make us dependent and subservient.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by badgerprints

Originally posted by SageBeno
Mr. Paul said. "People do not want anything cut," he said. "They want all the bailouts to come. They want the Fed to keep printing the money. And they don't believe that we've gone off the cliff or are close to going off the cliff. They think we can patch it over, that we can somehow come up with some magic solution.


Hate to argue with Ron Paul but he's wrong.
People don't think they can patch it over.

They know we are past the point of no return.

They simply don't care as long as everybody gets screwed together.


This perfectly explains all the automobile purchases.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


Who do you back when no one has yours?



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by thePharaoh
 


The problem is that Ron Paul stands for the future of the people, whereas the current setting is that the government stands for the future of themselves. How else could the level of corruption that exists in the goverment still remain that way?

If the government was not corrupt the entire world would have FREE ENERGY.
Instead, America is IMPRISONING anybody who produces a zero point generator on grounds of terrorism.
I ask you, how can one be a terrorist when trying to benefit the world!!!?

THIS IS MADNESS.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


That is probably true to some extent. Some people most assuredly have deluded themselves into thinking it will all be ok because they're stupid, but at the same time there are many that know we are probably f^cked and that any chance we had to stop it went out the window with Ron Paul but whose to say he could have fixed it anyway. I mean I feel as though he had the best plan to fix our current situation what with auditing the fed and all but I don't think the efforts he's made since the election to audit the fed will happen and even if they do by the time it's been done it probably won't matter because we will have long before fallen into that abyss. At least when it happens I can say I voted for Ron Paul and I tried to make a difference no matter how fruitless. I certainly wasn't going to put my name with the one of the two turds neither of whom can or will fix the situation we're in without some ridiculous miracle that I certainly don't see coming. Even if it doesn't matter I'll not have my name with the captain of the sinking vessel that is the US when I know he's steering the ship toward an iceberg.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by The_Phantom
 


The way I'm reading this, he thinks Romney would have been a better choice than Obama. If he thinks that we would have been better off with Romney he should've spoken up.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by thePharaoh
you can complain about ron paul...playing background

but what about hilary clinton....she dissapeared completely....never helped obama at all.....

obama should make romney secretary of state lol...


The Secretary of State is not allowed to campaign on anyone's behalf. That is why she did not, it is also why she did not attend the convention.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by The_Phantom
 


The way I'm reading this, he thinks Romney would have been a better choice than Obama. If he thinks that we would have been better off with Romney he should've spoken up.


Yeah he is saying Romney is a better choice than Obama, but Ron Paul fans have always known that. But they believe that Romney was a bad choice as well. All he is saying is that those that voted for Obama did so with a certain attitude that is completely wrong. I agree with him, but no endorsement would have made me vote for Romney and Ron Paul didn't sell out for the lesser of two evils. Anybody that has heard a Ron Paul supporter talk at all knows that they called Romney the lesser of two evils for a long time now.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Americanist
reply to post by SageBeno
 


Ron and Rand are watered down like the rest of them. Their supporters turned them into instant millionaires, so they should do us all a favor and both retire. It'll give them plenty of time to catch up on the 9/11's.


This was posted earlier today:


You've all been witness to an organized diversion - accumulating hard assets with little or no effort involved. Label it banking, monarchy, oligarchy, divide and conquer... It doesn't matter at this point. The trickery doesn't work, nor will holding onto its spoils.

Game Over Man.
edit on 8-11-2012 by Americanist because: (no reason given)


Care to explain how Ron Paul made millions off his supporters? I do believe Ron Paul was one of the only candidates who wasn't in debt when he stopped campaigning so are you saying he kept all that money in his campaign fund? A retirement plan, if you would. If so, you got any links?





top topics
 
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join