Ron Paul: "You get 'harassed and rushed off' if you disagree with liberal elements"

You gotta love Ron and how he has a way of "keeping it real".

If people don’t agree with the liberal elements, they can be harassed and rushed off. Rights are being abused,” the libertarian politician stated. “A lot of us are hoping it doesn’t get violent.”
This is true not only during the street protests, Paul noted, but also at college campuses where liberal and left-wing campaigners have been trying to shut down and chase away conservative speakers. On several occasions, their tactics led to intense scuffles and even riots. Loud activists have also been ambushing politicians and government officials during off-duty hours and surrounding their offices. High-profile figures like Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Homeland Security chief Kirstjen Nelsen were driven out of restaurants, while Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) was cornered and shouted at in an elevator.

He goes on in the article to point out this little tid bit:

“We should have a ‘second party.’ We have Republicans and Democrats which are basically the same. They argue over power and personalities,” Paul told RT. “We need a real opposition party.”
Paul pointed out that among the things that the two leading parties are aligned on is Wall Street. According to him, the main reason for the recent major dip in US stock market prices is that for the last 10 years the Federal Reserve issued a “massive amount of credit which causes the distortions, malinvestment, and the debt.”
“This is a bipartisan thing: Republicans and Democrats want the Fed there to print [all] this money.”

link

Seriously though......

The rhetoric is getting out of control and things are getting more violent out there. The "caring, loving bleeding heart liberals" seem to have been infected with rabies.
Quad

a reply to: Quadrivium

He's right about them being the same and things getting violent.

Truth be told this is nothing new, it's just worse now.

But if we're really going to delve into this let's be honest with ourselves, and say both sides have committed violence. At the time the left has been rioting more and carrying out more acts of violence.

We all know it's coming from the increasing rhetoric and provocation of both sides.

The American people are the victims, held hostage by two broken parties each upping the Ante.

We can find evidence on this site of the willingness of both sides to take it to the next level.

"impending civil war" as I hear it.

Both sides willing to point the finger at everybody but themselves.

Eta: Ron Paul has been my favorite candidate I've seen in my lifetime. He has started to get a little off the rails in his later years unfortunately, just not on this.

a reply to: CriticalStinker


As a libertarian I agree with most of what you posted, yet I feel liberals (far left) have always been this way.

I have said this many times and it needs to repeated many more. It is my Opinion:

Liberals are adults that have never fully matured mentally. Somewhere between the ages of 13 and 17 their mentality stopped developing and they are stuck at that awkward state between puberty and adulthood.
They are very much like the headstrong teenager whom thinks they know better than the wiser more experience parent and rebel when things don't go their way.

a reply to: Quadrivium

They probably think the same thing about the inverse.

Liberal politicians pander and play their audience. But they're all fake.

The only real one we've seen recently is Bernie. I don't agree with most of his platform and understand critisim he's never had a job, among other notable points.

But his campaign was talking about his platform. He was mature about how he presented himself, the inverse ideologically of Ron Paul.

Ironically both parties burned them each. That's because their isn't supposed to be true contrast to oppose each other. That puts the status quo at threat.

a reply to: Quadrivium

I think we just have to accept America is full of political hooligans.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Quadrivium

I think we just have to accept America is full of political hooligans.

That would make it sound like the hooligans are the majority. The hooligans just happen to be the loudest.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Sure, the loudest are always on display, much in the same way football hooligans are a minority but make a lot of noise.

We all need to listen to Ron Paul. He was in Congress nearly 30 years and he knows what's up. If the left and their fake "ows" movement (the start of the sjw movement) hadn't hijacked him, in collusion with the fake media (Fox being a major contributor) I think we would be on a much better path to success.

With that said, let's not hope Trump fails.

Divisive 2 party politics. Putting the United back in the United States.

Won't change until the majority on both sides who are not 'squeaky wheel' nut jobs get off their backsides and do something about it.

Honestly it's not as bad as it seems. It's just the minority who are insane and the MSM giving them all air time that makes it seem so bad. In saying that though, it's not exactly great either.

Maybe if we stopped giving the crazy's attention, and started pressing government to focus on matters that affect EVERYBODY, things might change.

But as long as people are just bitching on the internet and nothing else, # will stay the same.

originally posted by: AtomicKangaroo
Divisive 2 party politics. Putting the United back in the United States.

Won't change until the majority on both sides who are not 'squeaky wheel' nut jobs get off their backsides and do something about it.

Honestly it's not as bad as it seems. It's just the minority who are insane and the MSM giving them all air time that makes it seem so bad. In saying that though, it's not exactly great either.

Maybe if we stopped giving the crazy's attention, and started pressing government to focus on matters that affect EVERYBODY, things might change.

But as long as people are just bitching on the internet and nothing else, # will stay the same.

Hmmm.
So what exactly are you suggesting there sunny buck?
Is it your opinion we should "scratch off" on the govment?

a reply to: Quadrivium


I think the time for civility is at its end.


#### 'em.

Lets do this sh#t.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Quadrivium


I think the time for civility is at its end.


#### 'em.

Lets do this sh#t.

DC my friend....
You are a GREAT Poster. I have enjoyed so many of your new post as well as MANY of the old.

This is a time of great trouble for the US.....

As long as there are still people willing to fight I will stand with them.
I agree 100% brother.
LET them bring it!
We will finish it.
Just like in 1814

a reply to: Quadrivium

I'm suggesting when you have a government that seems to have problems with corruption and seems to be serving itself and not the people you do what needs to be done to get rid of said government.

Not the half that suits you, all of it.

Viva la revolution and all that. Does not need to be violent. But it needs the majority of citizens to be on the same page.

A real democracy the people should be able to tell their 'employees' they're fired, and the police and military should stand by those citizens.

Politicians need a reminder of who they work for, what there job actually are.

Any wonder our respective western nations are as they are when we keep electing rich old idiots over intelligent people qualified and suited for the positions?

People who have real life experiences. People who know how much a carton of milk and a loaf of read costs.

it's 2018. time for new amendments and constitutions to reflect the time instead of ones written for the wild wild west. Internet and cars and tech and more did not exist back then.

I think the guys who wrote the U.S documents would be like "Really couple of hundred years later and you've not made any changes to what we wrote? Not amended the amendments? What are you people stupid?"

I dunno, all I know is we keep electing via the two party system playing by their rules, nothing is ever going to change, we'll all just keep going around in circles especially if we do nothing but bitch on the internet about it.

originally posted by: Wookiep
We all need to listen to Ron Paul. He was in Congress nearly 30 years and he knows what's up. If the left and their fake "ows" movement (the start of the sjw movement) hadn't hijacked him, in collusion with the fake media (Fox being a major contributor) I think we would be on a much better path to success.

With that said, let's not hope Trump fails.

Then he left Congress, took a whole bunch of money from Russia, and now speaks out as an anti American defector on RT.

The man is a traitor.

originally posted by: AtomicKangaroo
I'm suggesting when you have a government that seems to have problems with corruption and seems to be serving itself and not the people you do what needs to be done to get rid of said government.

The government would be a lot less corrupt if it was representative of the votes of the people.

The current President lost the popular vote.
4/8 justices on the Supreme Court were appointed by the party that has only won 2 of the last 8 elections.
The most recent justice was approved with a Senate majority that only represented 41% of the nations population.
52% of the Senate is represented by 42% of the population. We are on track for 1/3 of the population to control 2/3 of the Senate within the next 20 years.
The Republicans should only have a 6 seat majority in the House based on the popular vote. However, they have a 43 seat majority.

We're supposed to have a representative government, but that is no longer the case.

a reply to: Aazadan

popular vote hey? .... so what does it say when for example 50% voted for neither candidate?
If about 25% voted for Donald or Hillary, that means 75% wanted neither candidate.....

Quite clearly the American election process is overly drawn out and unnecessarily complicated. To me any way.
That is most of your problems right there.

This vote, that vote. How about people just vote for a candidate. One vote and done.....

All these stats and percentages just reinforces what I think about the 2 party oligarchy system..... sorry democratic system... It's stupid, broken and outdated.

Then I begin to wonder if Hillary won under the same conditions, would her supporters be crying "Well Donald won the popular vote, despite my candidate winning, that's just wrong! I wanted Hillary, but she's not my president?"

For some reason I doubt it.

But yes, seems we agree the system is broken. Question is what are people going to do about it?
If they do something about it other than complain on the internet, will it be a push for a system that is for everybody? Or will it be pushing for a system that suits their own political views and agenda?

Are you mad at the system being broken, or are you mad the system has not gone in your favour?

For me the whole lot needs to go and a new system, a real democracy, is put into place. Where politicians are employees not leaders.
Same for in my country. It's 2018, it's time we as a species all started acting like it.

Whatever replaces it, it needs to not be an overly complicated cluster # filled with loop holes where the politicians are the only winners.

a reply to: AtomicKangaroo

If I had my way I would pass a constitutional amendment to enable ranked choice voting.

originally posted by: AtomicKangaroo
Then I begin to wonder if Hillary won under the same conditions, would her supporters be crying "Well Donald won the popular vote, despite my candidate winning, that's just wrong! I wanted Hillary, but she's not my president?"

For some reason I doubt it.

A follow up for this since the edit timer has expired. Republicans have won 2 of the last 8 Presidential elections yet historically hold far more power than that. Due to districting, Democrats need to win the house by a 60-40 margin to claim half the seats.

Forget Not my President. It's not my government. The will of the people is not reflected in who wins seats.

Hitsorically one or more constitutional amendments has been passed on average every 13 years. It has been 26 years since the last one. We are overdue and it is time for a change.

I don't really care who wins elections as long as it's the people who get to fairly decide. But, I would like to see a system that promotes less extreme candidates. If I had my way I would make a few changes to government in order to do that:

1. Ranked choice voting. The winner is whoever gets the most votes rather than a first past the post system. I could take it or leave it regarding electoral votes vs a popular vote. But if the EC were to remain the balance of votes per state needs to be addressed.

2. House districts. Totally remove gerrymandering. Cluster population centers when possible, and use simple rectangular districts. Have districts cross state lines. The total number of Reps is open to debate, but it should be very similar for every district across the country.

3. Senate appointment. This should not be elected by the general public. States should appoint their own senators.

4. Supreme court. We need to address the politics of appointing people. This has gotten out of hand in the last 20 years. My suggestion would be that every President gets 1 pick per year. Keep lifetime terms. This would grow the court to roughly 50 justices over time. Tie breaks would be handled by giving the justice with the most seniority a tiebreaking vote.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Ding! Ding!

Love that perspective. Had not thought of it myself, but see it now that you pointed it out.

Bernie got squashed by his own party the same way Ron Paul got squashed …

The monopolies of power don't want any competition, for sure.

originally posted by: Fowlerstoad
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Ding! Ding!

Love that perspective. Had not thought of it myself, but see it now that you pointed it out.

Bernie got squashed by his own party the same way Ron Paul got squashed …

The monopolies of power don't want any competition, for sure.

The difference is that Ron Pauls campaign was funded by the Russians. Bernies wasn't.