what are the reasons people have a ron paul hard-on

[NoDrama]

The fact is that when America was at it's best was when our economy had the strictest regulations. There were still financial incentives and wealthy people, it was just limited. Do you really see 1940's-1960's as a dark oppressive time?

You are mistaking correlation for causation, I could easily correlate the proliferation of Color TV as the cause of every thing good in that time period, and it would in fact correlate better than your mistaken belief. That doesn't make it correct though.

From the 40's through the 60's was a good time because the rest of the world was a smoking ruin after WW2, when the only mousetraps being made are made in USA, USA has a beaten path to its door. Which is yet again a better correlation. Why aren't things manufactured here anymore? Why have 80% of all manufacturing jobs gone overseas? Why have so many closed their doors in the USA? Must be that economic system you think is so swell. Ever notice that off-shoring really started only after NAFTA and WTO were in place? Did you miss that?

The middle class is created by factory jobs, jobs that produce things(AKA Wealth). Yep, things are great as is, no jobs, dwindling middle class, growing poor and homeless population. Jobs leaving the country faster than you can say Cheap Chinese labor. All of it caused by WTO and NAFTA and making China most favored status.

 

[RyanTheRhino]

I hear ya cali it just is unnerving to hear all this he's gonna change the country talk. I wonder what he will do if he were to get in though, usually when a leader comes to power on a platform of changing things when they really can't it turns into a shit storm of epic tidings.

That is the beauty of Ron Paul his goals are so extreme that when it comes time to negotiate he will get the better deal. We may not cut off all foreing aid but it would be dramatically decreased. He may get a few regulations & departments removed but the important ones will stay. He is just pushing the people to decide do we really need this crap we cant afford it. The people will let you know & i bet the department of education would be one that says.

If you vote for a moderate president then he/she has no leverage in congress. You need to be extreme to get anything done or elss you get these compromises that cut spending here and add it over there accomplishing absolutely nothing. essentially they are just letting the budget float around so the republicans can say we did this while the democrats say they did that.




The people on the edge who claim Ron Paul is to extreme need to understand that once in office everything gets scaled down towards more moderate views.

 

[deprave]

You must be trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill because i don't think you understand the Position. RP doesn't want to get rid of every financial regulation oh no, not at all, he wants to get rid of BUSINESS STIFLING regulations. Now either you agree that ALL regulations are business stifling or you believe that SOME regulations stifle small business. NO WHERE AND IN NO QUOTE YOU WILL EVER FIND does RP say he wants to get rid of all regulations everywhere, saying he wants that is just making up lies, which you have been doing for weeks upon weeks now. Even after being corrected you still haven't learned anything, your ideas in no way reflect what RP wants to accomplish since your ideas are not his.

You find RP 's ideas completely wrong becasue you do not understand his position AT ALL!! You make up ideas and say that they are his, he says he wants to get rid of regulation that hurt small business and you interpret that as him wanting to get rid of ALL regulations. A person can only speak the words he speaks, if you are unable to correctly interpret the English language I suggest another crack at 3rd grade.

Fiscal issues? he wants it to be just like the Constitution mandates it to be. The system we have right now is the wrong one, it makes the rich rich and everyone else poorer, but somehow the Boob Tube has convinced you that this is the best way to live life, to be happy by being a slave to the system. So sure that your way of life currently must be the right path you are unwilling to release your bonds for even a taste of true freedom.

BTW if you haven't noticed, the world is a changing, the rich are getting richer, the middle class is on its way out, yet you defend the system to your utmost because anything else would mean change, and people are afraid of change, are you? Those people that voted for Obama wanted change, they didn't get any though, so that there proves that people are thirsty for something better, real change, not this sleight of hand magic trick change Obama promised.

The video says nothing about NAFTA not being "Free Trade" enough, but does discuss the fact that Congress has delegated some of its Authority on trade to the executive, at the same time he says it is the duty of Congress to protect us and our liberties. That would make it Constitutional, but I guess you are against the Constitution seeing as you don't like most of what RP stands for, which is basically the Constitution.

Dr Paul knows more about economics and financial services and central banking than 99.9999% of all people in the world.

NAFTA and WTO create special interests that use the laws to further their agenda and take money out of OUR pockets, Dr. Paul discusses this, but you seem to have missed it, just like you seem to have missed the point of the entire video which you linked.

Quoted for truth...You see why I get frustrated..he goes as far as to call libertarians and Ron Paul Anarchist.....then resorts to 'fuck you' when I make a semi-stern post lol...+REP

 

[fenderburn84]

Ryantherhino I liked the way you put that, I hope it works I really do, cause man we need something different this he won't let me do anything government is not doing is any favors.

 

[canndo]

The problem is corruption driven by corporate money, not career politicians. Politicians should be pandering to the people, not big business.

All I will say about the NDAA is that a bill nick named the "indefinate detention act" should immediately raise alarm bells for Americans because it would violate the Constitution if such a bill existed. It wouldn't be the first time that Obama has talked about how we need indefinate military detention in America.

My personal stance on it is that if there is any question as to whether it violates the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, than the bill should automatically be trashed and started over from scratch with those principles in mind.

And so long as corporations pretend that they are just "citizens" but can back any bill or candidate with as much money as they wish, thing won't change - a constitutional amendment denying corporations citizenship is in order.

 

[canndo]

A lot seperates libertarians from anarchist. If you want the basically of it then...Libertarians recognize the need for governement and Anarchist do not, anarchist believe in a stateless society, Libertarians believe in constitutional rights and natural rights from governments, the right of the people over government, in humanity.

so long as government is kept weaker than corporations, the people will be abused.

 

[fenderburn84]

Imho not to sound like a nut, hear me out, I think if you took a few Nah scratch that all of those sobs who are behind this little economic meltdown and Hung em by the neck the next group to take power would think twice.

 

[Dan Kone]

You must be trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill because i don't think you understand the Position. RP doesn't want to get rid of every financial regulation oh no, not at all, he wants to get rid of BUSINESS STIFLING regulations.

Some "business stifling" regulations are those necessary financial regulations that protect us. Like the Ron Paul quote I gave shows, Ron Paul was in favor of getting rid of Glass Steagal. Getting rid of Glass Steagal has been a disaster. It's created too big to fail banks that needed bailouts because we removed the regulations that stopped them from gambling on Wall St.

Was Glass Steagal "business stifling"? Yes, it certainly was. Did getting rid of it lead to total disaster? Definitely. Nearly all regulations stifle business, that doesn't make them less necessary.

So you can pretend that Ron Paul only wants to get rid of bad regulations, but it isn't true. His philosophy seems to be to let us get rid of most of these financial protections regardless of the damage it will do to the economy and then just "let the free market sort them out". That would be perfectly reasonable if a company's successes or failures happen in a vaccuum, but they don't. What financial services companies do can effect the entire economy. When they fail, our economy can fail with them. And what's Ron Paul's solution to that? Let the free market sort it out! Well as we've seen millions of people who had nothing to do with the financial services industry have lost their jobs due to their actions. It's simply not good enough to let the free market sort them out, because when they do, innocent people suffer for it. That's why the regulations exist in the first place.

• Fiscal issues? he wants it to be just like the Constitution mandates it to be.​

  
  
  ​

Do you really believe that every fiscal issue that is relevant today was also relevant in 18th century agrarian America? The fact is that we live in a much different world than we did then. We play by a different set of rules today. The world is a smaller place. If you really think we can play by the same set of rules that we did when the primary form of transportation was a horse, you're extremely naive.

 

[Dan Kone]

You are mistaking correlation for causation, I could easily correlate the proliferation of Color TV as the cause of every thing good in that time period, and it would in fact correlate better than your mistaken belief. That doesn't make it correct though.

From the 40's through the 60's was a good time because the rest of the world was a smoking ruin after WW2, when the only mousetraps being made are made in USA, USA has a beaten path to its door. Which is yet again a better correlation. Why aren't things manufactured here anymore? Why have 80% of all manufacturing jobs gone overseas? Why have so many closed their doors in the USA? Must be that economic system you think is so swell. Ever notice that off-shoring really started only after NAFTA and WTO were in place? Did you miss that?

We have war and innovation now just like we did then. The real variable is that we are trading with countries that use what amounts to indentured servitude as labor. And we do so relatively freely forcing American labor to compete with people in south east asia who live in make shift tin shacks. Ron Paul thinks that's a good thing. I do not.

The middle class is created by factory jobs, jobs that produce things(AKA Wealth).

If they had their way there would be no middle class, only poor people to do their labor. We can't rely on the kindness of the ultra-wealthy to support a middle class. It must be enforced through government intervention or it will not exist. That's how it's always been across the world going back to the Greek city states and Rome where they used to give poor people farm land and pay teachers and doctors from outside the cities to move in to them.

 

[Zaehet Strife]

The field really is only two candidates. The others have fallen off of multiple states ballots, there is no way they will get enough delegates to win the nomination. The media doesn't want to talk about that because Romney is not catching any conservative attention and the only other one available they would rather see thrown in prison.

There are people on this forum who are like politicians and are stuck on talking points. You take the conversation away from their talking points they just go AWOL.

who are the two candidates? romney and paul?

 

[sync0s]

so long as government is kept weaker than corporations, the people will be abused.

[FONT=Arial, Arial, Helvetica]"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." Thomas Jefferson

[/FONT]

I have issue with your use of the word "kept." Right now, it is our government that is propping the corporations up. I think the better phrase is: so long as the people are kept weaker than the corporations, the people will be abused.

Imho not to sound like a nut, hear me out, I think if you took a few Nah scratch that all of those sobs who are behind this little economic meltdown and Hung em by the neck the next group to take power would think twice.

Problem is nobody wants to admit the truth in who is really involved in that. One side wants to say it's the corporations and that damn greedy 1%, while the other side wants to blame fannie mae and freddie mac. The truth is the ones who are pointing the fingers are the primary culprits. The bastards in Washington have over regulated our industry in areas that have propped up their lobbyists benefactors while effectively not prosecuting the criminals on wall street who don't give a fuck about any of the regulations or laws that already exist and pushing stiffer penalties on regular citizens who steal a loaf of bread or smoke a fucking joint. This goes on all the while selling our government and it's once free people to the highest bidder behind closed doors.

We need to face the facts. It isn't the greed on corporate levels that is ruining this country. It isn't that our government is over regulated and it's stifling business. It's that our political leaders don't give a fuck about the citizens of America.

 

[fenderburn84]

I hear that. I wonder what we the people would have done had Adams done these things? I think him and his wife and kids would have been shot as a warning. We as a people have become so soft our founders would be ashamed.

 

[NoDrama]

Some "business stifling" regulations are those necessary financial regulations that protect us. Like the Ron Paul quote I gave shows, Ron Paul was in favor of getting rid of Glass Steagal. Getting rid of Glass Steagal has been a disaster. It's created too big to fail banks that needed bailouts because we removed the regulations that stopped them from gambling on Wall St.

Was Glass Steagal "business stifling"? Yes, it certainly was. Did getting rid of it lead to total disaster? Definitely. Nearly all regulations stifle business, that doesn't make them less necessary.

So you can pretend that Ron Paul only wants to get rid of bad regulations, but it isn't true. His philosophy seems to be to let us get rid of most of these financial protections regardless of the damage it will do to the economy and then just "let the free market sort them out". That would be perfectly reasonable if a company's successes or failures happen in a vaccuum, but they don't. What financial services companies do can effect the entire economy. When they fail, our economy can fail with them. And what's Ron Paul's solution to that? Let the free market sort it out! Well as we've seen millions of people who had nothing to do with the financial services industry have lost their jobs due to their actions. It's simply not good enough to let the free market sort them out, because when they do, innocent people suffer for it. That's why the regulations exist in the first place.



Do you really believe that every fiscal issue that is relevant today was also relevant in 18th century agrarian America? The fact is that we live in a much different world than we did then. We play by a different set of rules today. The world is a smaller place. If you really think we can play by the same set of rules that we did when the primary form of transportation was a horse, you're extremely naive.

Hello again??? are you unable to find the voting record??????
Ron Paul did not vote for the repeal of the glass steagal act!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/money-and-votes-aligned-in-con.html

Dude, keep making up lies, I will thwart them with truth!!!!!!

the voting record which proves one of three things, you are a liar, and once a liar always a liar; you are full of shit and guessed, or you are genuinely trying to deceive, which one is it? Let us know so that we can take certain liberties with your future posts!!
Liar, idiot, or intentional misinformationist? I suppose " oops, I guess i didn't understand his position and was wrong, pardon my french" will do nicely too, thank you.

 

[NoDrama]

Do you really believe that every fiscal issue that is relevant today was also relevant in 18th century agrarian America? The fact is that we live in a much different world than we did then. We play by a different set of rules today. The world is a smaller place. If you really think we can play by the same set of rules that we did when the primary form of transportation was a horse, you're extremely naive.

What fiscal issues are different? Deficits? same thing. government borrowing? same thing. Monetary control by bankers ? Same fucking thing, ask President Jackson. Creation of Money from nothing? Been going on since 1694. Talk to a fella named Paterson, he will tell you all about it.

 

[deprave]

so long as government is kept weaker than corporations, the people will be abused.

Not true, The government is bad also, governments are inherently corrupt this has been true since the dawn of civilizations. There are two enemies of mankind in this world Government and Private Sector...the two of them merging is the absolute worse possible thing that can happen and this is the result of empowering either one...Really with our mega corporations they work in tandum regardless...at the root of these evils is money and the monetary system..(Money, the root of all evil)..

We must not only take governemt down a peg but we must take down big pharama, big oil, big finance, etc...down a peg...or two pegs..


Anyway, this is very dangerous way of thinking here...to think that government is all good and can do no wrong, or even that its the lesser of two evils, its just not true at all, it is in fact just as dangerous. I can't believe they convince people this, an ancient knowledge such as this being suppressed shows me they are winning.

They have the Republicans preaching for the private sector - while democrats praise for big government. Its a win win situation for evil.

[video=youtube;2fex9XYBcSI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fex9XYBcSI[/video]

 

[fenderburn84]

Love the song deprave just got ripped up listening to it.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

Yeah cos they're not fucking you now or anything...

And they don't write the regulations.

It's hilarious to me that probably a bunch of the liberals on this site are well aware of what will probably happen to this plant we all love if it becomes legalized (small scale forced out of production through government regulations to enable corporations to control and dominate the market), but as far as everything else goes.... it's all in the name of protecting us from ourselves and good honest policy!

 

[sync0s]

And they don't write the regulations.

It's hilarious to me that probably a bunch of the liberals on this site are well aware of what will probably happen to this plant we all love if it becomes legalized (small scale forced out of production through government regulations to enable corporations to control and dominate the market), but as far as everything else goes.... it's all in the name of protecting us from ourselves and good honest policy!

That is the reason why it is not legal is because marijuana is natural and therefore much harder to patent and control. Big Pharma would have a hard time cornering the market in marijuana, therefore their interests are in Marinol (because of patents). Marijuana is only illegal because our government was(is) paid off by lumber, pharma, oil, etc. Too many powerful lobbies would be hurt badly by its legalization.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

I agree with you completely about rehashing a bill if there is question about it. Don't get me wrong I really don't like what I hear in that nda but I also did not see where it said citizens could be detained but I did see where it said it couldn't happen to citizens. Not trying to argue I just don't see how that is an issue on the level its being sold as ya know. I also agree the corporations are killing us but I just don't trust a man that loves politics so much he makes a life out of it. Might just be me being a fool as well though, it has been known to happen lol.

It's in there. The section you refer to clearly states that the military has a choice in whether to indefinitely detain someone (military/executive), not that they can't do it. There is no practical difference.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

No problem, I could go on for a really long time, if you have any questions feel free to ask. I also want to mention Ron Paul is the only candidate technically in the 99% and will remain so, he has vowed to take a salary of the average american which would be currently around 39k a year. Dr Paul is also the only veteran and the only medical doctor...and he has the most experience.

Ron Paul is a millionaire. Make no mistake. But I don't see how that disqualifies him from anything. He's remained consistent and honest about his positions for a long time, only rarely flip flopping when it is logical to do so, and never hiding that he has done so (ie: death penalty).