I support most of his policies and I'm prepared to vote for him either as a frontrunner or as a 3rd party candidate.
He is the only truthful bastard running right now.
I support most of his policies and I'm prepared to vote for him either as a frontrunner or as a 3rd party candidate.
He is the only truthful bastard running right now.
FBHO
I could vote for him if he makes it that far as a Republican, right now in a primary he'd probably get my vote (chances are it will be settled before that happens). If it came down to voting 3rd party or nothing I think I'd take nothing (not voting). The benefit wouldn't outweigh the effort to vote 3rd party IMO.
That said I think he's already killed any chance of getting the nomination or winning 3rd party. The way he's handled the foreign policy questions really makes me wonder if he's as smart I've been told he is. It seems like he's more interested in pushing his points then getting elected.
The thing is, Ron Paul hasn't changed his core message since he first began running for office decades ago. Yet his ideas keep growing more and more popular on the national scene with every election cycle. It wasn't long ago he was only garnering single-digits, an annoyance at best. Now he's polling over 20% consistently every single time.
I agree that its doubtful the Republican Establishment will allow him to win this time around, but in 2016 he might really upset the apple cart, especially if Romney wins this year and governs like the Massachusetts moderate he is and really alienates the conservative base. The 2016 Republican primaries would be very interesting to watch indeed.
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
I support his foreign policy. We have no reason to go to war in another country for no real reason, and do so at the drop of a hat.
The foreign wars are just to keep our eyes off what the Liberals are doing in this country to our freedoms.
If you had read "1984" many years ago, you would be aware of what purpose the various wars are for. You can be sure the Liberals used "1984" as a "how to" to control the American people.
There was no real reason for the USA to go to war against Iraq or Afganistan. Hell, there wasn't even a reason for the USA's war in Vietnam for ten years, either. All of these wars did NOT have any "Declaration of War" by Congress as required by the U.S. Constitution. These were PRESIDENTIAL WARS by Liberals. And, YES, all the presidents involved were Liberals.
Last edited by Shadow Walker; 01-20-2012 at 11:38 AM.
20%? You mean except SC where he's in the mid teens? I'm not sure the RP polling numbers are a sign of his message spreading or an indication of how weak the field is this go around...Originally Posted by LAGC
I',m totally for RP !!! He's honest and honorable ....
Nothing but the finest weapon construction and parts used !
I'll write him in no matter who gets the rino slot.
Is his foreign policy dangerous or is it helpful to us?
FBHO
Ron Paul is an honest man and sticks by his beliefs. That does not make his beliefs always valid. The gold standard? Think on this statement about US gold reserves:
Today, holdings are 4,578 metric tons (147.2 million oz. troy ) in 368,000 standard, 400 oz. troy (12.4 kg or 27.4 lb avoirdupois) gold bars. At August 22, 2011 rates of $1890.04 an ounce [5] it is worth $278.3 billion,
If the US Dollar were redeemable for that gold, at that price, it wouldn't even begin to make the GNP, much less meet out country's debt or anything else. Our Dollars would be gone, with our gold, overseas in a matter of days.
Last edited by N/A; 01-20-2012 at 08:16 PM.
IMO, dangerous, as we can be attacked in days, hours and even minutes. We can't just sit back and let the world go to hell and do nothing.
I believe Ralph Nader has seen a similar ebb and flow of his support over all the years he's attempted runs for pres...doesn't mean I'd vote for him either.
If we refuse to rule ourselves with reason, then we shall be ruled by our passions.
He, Who Will Not Reason, Is a Bigot; He, Who Cannot, Is a Fool; and He, Who Dares Not, Is a Slave. -Sir William Drummond
There are some things I will not abide within my sight!
I believe we'd be much better off sitting back and letting the world go to hell. What would they have for a reason to attack us if we were so strong that it would be a fool's task. Might and power at home, the ability to reach out and decisively destroy the bad guys when they attack (I like ICBMs and the current technologies quite a bit), and a strong military to defend our nation is all the US armed forces need to be engaged in, in my opinion.
Ezra - Houston Tx
Old cranky member since 1999
And you think if we just stayed at home and let the world go to hell, that they would leave us alone? Isn't that what Obama promised us? Do you think if we stayed at home and let the world go to hell, that the people would long put up with having a standing army large enough that would be needed to convince any aggressor not to mess with us?
I don't.
Its how our nation was designed, I believe ts workable, sorry to disagree.
Ezra - Houston Tx
Old cranky member since 1999
There are several powerful nations on this earth that aren't attacked and they don't pre-emptively strike around the world. Hit them when they hit us, but stay out of their shit otherwise... and quit letting members of islamic nations immigrate here until the terrorism stops. Period.
I understand your sentiment N/A and I used to share it, but 75 years as the worlds policeman? I think it's time for this "cop" (our nation) to retire and enjoy some peace for a change.
We gave them hell, let's bring 'em home.
Trying to get on the no fly list, one post at a time.
I ain't saying we have to be waging active warfare everywhere. But maintaining a vigilant presence in stategic parts of the world is the best policy.
I'm just getting tired of him of blaming America for islamic terrorism, in essence that it's OUR fault that 9/11 occurred. Spare me.
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them. ... Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever."--Thomas Jefferson
I disagree with him on this as well, but I also know that we are a target of theirs for a reason. Likely because we are the big dog. Kinda like "counting coup" with every terrorist action. He isn't a perfect fit for me, but at least he get's the individual freedom thing. More than I can say for the rest of the Senate, Congress and the President.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counting_coup
Trying to get on the no fly list, one post at a time.
He's got my vote! He tells the truth, honors his oath, knows we got jacked by privatized banking and most of are agencies are illegal and unconstitutional. The "golden rule" still applies even if you are the "big dog."
Thomas Jefferson said in 1802: I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property – until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
There's always going to be a "big dog" or dogs in the world. They had theirs when they were pillaging all across the ME, Europe, Asia, and northern Africa killing all the unholy "infidels". Even if/when we "pull out of the ME", whatever you want that to mean, they're still going to want to kill us because we are still infidels to them, or we submit and pay their jizya. Paul might want to realize there are going to be people who want to kill us no matter if we 'leave them alone' or not.
If he wins the primary, great, I'll vote for him. But to think all our problems are magically going to be fixed cuz RON PAULLLLLL!!!! was elected is wishful thinking. He's going to need the help of the other two branches of gov't to do even half of what he claims he'd do. Yes Ron Paul is a different kind of politician, but he's still a politician. Until Congress and the Supreme Court are completely replaced by constitutionalists, things aren't going to change until the people in this country who have "skin in the game" outnumber the ones who don't.
Sorry, not trying to be a party pooper or denigrate Ron Paul. Just in a jaded mood at the moment.
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them. ... Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever."--Thomas Jefferson
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks