I swear this is my last Ron Paul thread

[LRM1]

Originally Posted by RedG For as many acclaimed republicans there are on MBworld, none sure seem to like anything Ron Paul does. Why I truly wonder, his ideas are truly conservative. There are ALOT of issues I agree with the Libertarians on. Of late, many more than I do with far right Republicans. My problem is a BIG part of their platform - war, foreign policy, etc. That part of their platform is very unrealistic. That, and the connections they have with the whackos makes me not take them as a serious party - as such, they do hurt the right side of the political establishment by syphoning votes as already stated, and by giving the left examples of the "nuts" on the other side of the fence - lets face it, it isn't liberals swarming to the libertarian cause.

To remove this ad, register today or login if you already are registered!

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by RedG

Your statement is misleading, and meanders the discussion. I don't believe 9/11 was our fault, nor would I say Ron Paul directly believes elements of our government were involved. It isn't out of the realm of reason to surmise that since our Military is so involved in other countries, and has been for so long, that many have become disenfranchised and distasteful of our foreign policies.

You couldn't think that if we'd not be so involved in those countries (specifically Saudi Arabia), that Osama wouldn't have wanted to destroy us for so long?

Except that this is what Ron Paul has said on multiple occasions. I'm not speculating on this at all. It's also exactly what Rudy owned him on during the debate. As for our foreign policy, this may be the reasoning that people use to attack us, but that certainly does not make it our fault. If someone you know gets hit and killed by a drunk driver, would you argue that it is his/her fault because he/she was out there driving?

Truth hurts to many, and because of that many are too weak to struggle through their pains of understand and embracing the truth. It isn't a lack of leadership on Ron Paul's part, but a mental ineptitude of the members of the House and Congress.

The "truth" is that Ron Paul has been completely ineffective as a Congressman. A good idea without the ability to put it into action is worth nothing. A sign of a leader is the ability to get others to follow. A leader without anyone following is not really leading anybody or anything. But despite all of this, some people like yourselves believe that electing Ron Paul as POTUS will all of a sudden give him sanity, and give him the ability to lead. While I knew this was foolish optimism prior to the election, I think Obama himself has shown that the leadership skill doesn't just appear with inauguration.

When one constantly champions responsibility of self over entitlements or money-for-nothing do-nothings it fails as well on deaf ears. Those on MBworld that seek for nothing more but truth and transparency of government chastise the one of very few realists and its unfortunate.

He hasn't "championed" anything except a message to his own kool aid drinkers. As for "money for nothing", you should really have a closer look at Paul's voting record. You'll find he doesn't exactly practice what he preaches.

You want and strive for change? Stop believing the status quo, stop thinking that basic solutions and appeasement are any sort of bringer of the freedoms that were so given from our Constitution and from our Founding Fathers.

Depends on what you mean by change. Certainly Obama is not the status quo, and campaigned on change. I could do without this type of change thank you very much. The only change I think Paul would bring to the office is the change of presidential leadership. He would lower it even more than Obama.

A truly scary statement to even contemplate, let alone articulate. Shame on you.

I don't think so. Even if I don't like Obama or agree with his policies, I think he is a better leader than Dr. Paul. Some of the things that Ron Paul suggested he would do right away scare me more than Obama Care getting passed.

I would rather vote for David Hasselhoff than Ron Paul.

[vraa]

Originally Posted by revstriker

I would rather vote for David Hasselhoff than Ron Paul.

This is something we agree on.

[JustPete]

I see there's a lot of people here that really don't have a clue what Paul stands for or understand anything beyond the criticism his opponents concocted on his positions.

That's a shame ... Even McCain called Paul the most honest man in Congress.

[JustPete]

Originally Posted by revstriker

The "truth" is that Ron Paul has been completely ineffective as a Congressman.

You might want to consider why this is ... Is it because he's wrong? Or because he's right?

He's not part of the club of a$$holes we have running this country now. That's why he's been marginalized and MADE ineffective.

I don't know about you ... but for me? I'm tired of the a$$holess.

[Glasgow Gold]

Originally Posted by revstriker

He hasn't "championed" anything except a message to his own kool aid drinkers.
....
Depends on what you mean by change. Certainly Obama is not the status quo, and campaigned on change. I could do without this type of change thank you very much. The only change I think Paul would bring to the office is the change of presidential leadership. He would lower it even more than Obama.

I LOLed. Twice.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by JustPete

You might want to consider why this is ... Is it because he's wrong? Or because he's right?

He's not part of the club of a$$holes we have running this country now. That's why he's been marginalized and MADE ineffective.

I don't know about you ... but for me? I'm tired of the a$$holess.

It's not about whether he is right or wrong. It's about what he is able to accomplish. It's about the bills he's introduced, has campaigned for support on, and passed into law. Without these types of accomplishments, he is no more worthy of being a Congressman than any of the anonymous posters in this forum. How much is a good idea worth if you can't advance it from an idea to reality? The ability to campaign for support, and to pass meaningful legislation is not only harder as President, but it is also a more important qualification. So if Ron Paul can't get it done in Congress, why should anyone with any intelligence think he could get it done as President?

As for his position on things, I think I understand them quite well. And there are plenty of things I agree with him on. But his more radical beliefs are enough for me to know he is not right for Commander in Chief. His isolationist views, and his willingness to launch an investigation that the US blew up the twin towers (without any credible proof) is just too much.

[mleskovar]

Originally Posted by revstriker

It's not about whether he is right or wrong. It's about what he is able to accomplish. It's about the bills he's introduced, has campaigned for support on, and passed into law. Without these types of accomplishments, he is no more worthy of being a Congressman than any of the anonymous posters in this forum. How much is a good idea worth if you can't advance it from an idea to reality? The ability to campaign for support, and to pass meaningful legislation is not only harder as President, but it is also a more important qualification. So if Ron Paul can't get it done in Congress, why should anyone with any intelligence think he could get it done as President?

As for his position on things, I think I understand them quite well. And there are plenty of things I agree with him on. But his more radical beliefs are enough for me to know he is not right for Commander in Chief. His isolationist views, and his willingness to launch an investigation that the US blew up the twin towers (without any credible proof) is just too much.

Good analysis of RP. Most times he can talk the talk, but not walk the walk. He reminds me of a guest on a political talk show that can articulate his position very well but when asked for solutions he goes off into to ether.

[JustPete]

[quote=revstriker;3794270]

It's not about whether he is right or wrong. It's about what he is able to accomplish. It's about the bills he's introduced, has campaigned for support on, and passed into law. Without these types of accomplishments, he is no more worthy of being a Congressman than any of the anonymous posters in this forum. How much is a good idea worth if you can't advance it from an idea to reality?

Think about what your saying here for a moment. Right or wrong's not important? And consider why that's the case. We have a Congress that's currently littered with corruption. I have no doubt WHY he can't pass bills ... he's a party pooper.

We pay for their party ... and they've been having a good one for a long time now.

The ability to campaign for support, and to pass meaningful legislation is not only harder as President, but it is also a more important qualification. So if Ron Paul can't get it done in Congress, why should anyone with any intelligence think he could get it done as President?

I've heard this many times with regard to Paul and I totally disagree. The problem is being marginalized. As POTUS they can't pull that crap on him anymore. He had to fight to get into debates even as a top earning candidate with more support from the people and the US MILITARY than others.

As for his position on things, I think I understand them quite well. And there are plenty of things I agree with him on. But his more radical beliefs are enough for me to know he is not right for Commander in Chief. His isolationist views, and his willingness to launch an investigation that the US blew up the twin towers (without any credible proof) is just too much.

I'd believe you knew his position better if you didn't parrot the opposition line of his being an isolationist.

As for 9/11 ... I'm not even going to get into that other than to say, the original investigators have admitted, they did what they were told.

[JustPete]

Originally Posted by mleskovar

Good analysis of RP. Most times he can talk the talk, but not walk the walk. He reminds me of a guest on a political talk show that can articulate his position very well but when asked for solutions he goes off into to ether.

Balogne ... he's offered concrete solutions on every issue he confronts. No offense but, this is more opposition nonsense you're parroting.

I could tell you in every case what his position and solution is.

The thing most clear to me, is the smear tactics and marginalization of Paul worked incredibly well.

[Glasgow Gold]

Originally Posted by JustPete

As for 9/11 ... I'm not even going to get into that other than to say, the original investigators have admitted, they did what they were told.

Oh dear. Not you too?! I hoped we had contained the problem here.

[mleskovar]

Originally Posted by JustPete

...I have no doubt WHY he can't pass bills ... he's a party pooper....

Maybe you should think about what you're saying. So he's right and everyone else is wrong ?

[NdnMbLova]

He needs to be reminded that he is in POLITICS. It's sad to see the Congress in such a state.
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.

[S55inPA]

Originally Posted by NdnMbLova

He needs to be reminded that he is in POLITICS. It's sad to see the Congress in such a state.
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.

count me in. i am ready.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by JustPete

Think about what your saying here for a moment. Right or wrong's not important? And consider why that's the case. We have a Congress that's currently littered with corruption. I have no doubt WHY he can't pass bills ... he's a party pooper.

We pay for their party ... and they've been having a good one for a long time now.

You should think about what I am saying. For some reason, you are willing to stand behind a guy who cannot accomplish what the voters elected him to do. But instead of suggesting the guy stop running, you want to elevate him to President. Blaming his ineffectiveness on others in Congress is kind of a cop out.

I've heard this many times with regard to Paul and I totally disagree. The problem is being marginalized. As POTUS they can't pull that crap on him anymore. He had to fight to get into debates even as a top earning candidate with more support from the people and the US MILITARY than others.

You can't be serious. You think being elected president is all of a sudden going to give him a skill which he has thus far, proven he doesn't have? That is, the skill of leadership? In order for a president to be effective, he/she needs to lead Congress to pass the legislation which fulfill his/her campaign promises. This isn't automatic for the President. We can see the trouble that Obama is having trying to pass Health Care reform, and that is WITH party control of both the Congress and Senate, and on an issue which everybody agrees needs reform. Yet you think Ron Paul will be able to get this done for the radical ideas which he supports? His goals cannot be accomplished by executive order.

I'd believe you knew his position better if you didn't parrot the opposition line of his being an isolationist.

Not parroting any line. I am simply stating what Ron Paul believes. Call it what ever you want, but recalling your military, and stopping foreign aid is classic isolationism.

As for 9/11 ... I'm not even going to get into that other than to say, the original investigators have admitted, they did what they were told.

Except that he was asked if he would launch an investigation into the US blowing up the twin towers, and he admitted that he would. Now, this may have been a slip of the tongue, but it's a pretty big one. I would certainly hope a US Congressman would be smart enough NOT to insulate that the US was behind 9/11, never mind a US Congressman trying to be elected as President of the United States.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by JustPete

Balogne ... he's offered concrete solutions on every issue he confronts. No offense but, this is more opposition nonsense you're parroting.

I could tell you in every case what his position and solution is.

The thing most clear to me, is the smear tactics and marginalization of Paul worked incredibly well.

Please list these "concrete solutions" to problems which Ron Paul has introduced as legislation and was able to champion into law? Or how about examples of bills he introduced that at least made it through committee, and to the floor for a vote?

The truth is hardly a "smear tactic".

[JustPete]

Originally Posted by Glasgow Gold

Oh dear. Not you too?! I hoped we had contained the problem here.

I'm in the category of not caring anymore. But it's pretty obvious we weren't told everything.

[JustPete]

Originally Posted by mleskovar

Maybe you should think about what you're saying. So he's right and everyone else is wrong ?

In many instances he's been proven right.

It's amazing to me, people can't see we have a congress currently full of crooks and liars. I don't think to many people realize what a "club" congress is.

Jesse Ventura put it best when he said they all put on a show for the people and pretend to argue about issues and then behind closed doors they're best friends and what ever they want passed gets passed and what they don't want doesn't happen. The 2 party system, is all an illusion giving people the belief in choice.

I believe he's right.

[JustPete]

Originally Posted by NdnMbLova

He needs to be reminded that he is in POLITICS. It's sad to see the Congress in such a state.
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION.

Originally Posted by S55inPA

count me in. i am ready.

+1 that.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by JustPete

I'm in the category of not caring anymore. But it's pretty obvious we weren't told everything.

Yes, you are correct. We were never told how they got the explosives into the tower without anyone noticing. We were never told how they got all the people involved in planting the explosives to not come forward and talk about it. We were never told what happen to the people that were supposedly on the planes. We were never told where the footage of the plan hitting the tower was filmed, but my guess it was the same studio where they filmed the fake moon landing.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by JustPete

In many instances he's been proven right.

So again, where is the proof that he's been able to do anything? Isn't that what a Congressman is supposed to do; figure out what is right, and then work to get laws passed? Would you go to a doctor who was right about your diagnosis, but then refused to treat you? Would you want this person elevated and put in charge of a hospital?

Being right or wrong is irrelevant in evaluating his skill as a leader.

[Glasgow Gold]

Originally Posted by JustPete

I'm in the category of not caring anymore. But it's pretty obvious we weren't told everything.

My oh my. Speaking of "right" vs. "wrong," you're joining a list of regularly posting Troofers (below, with affiliation) that aren't exactly regarded as the brain trust of OT.

Goliath27 - Mossad;
M1M2M3 - Unknown, but doesn't matter, as it would be incomprehensible anyway;
Motorwerkz - Bush "inside job";
JustPete - Unknown

[JustPete]

Originally Posted by revstriker

You should think about what I am saying. For some reason, you are willing to stand behind a guy who cannot accomplish what the voters elected him to do. But instead of suggesting the guy stop running, you want to elevate him to President. Blaming his ineffectiveness on others in Congress is kind of a cop out.

But he does in most cases do what his constituents want. That's why he keeps getting re-elected.

We have a group of crooks and thieves in the Whitehouse. Paul doesn't play along.

Look at the big CHANGE we got. More of the same BS.

The people want real change ... it's not going to come from any candidate they feed us.

You can't be serious. You think being elected president is all of a sudden going to give him a skill which he has thus far, proven he doesn't have? That is, the skill of leadership? In order for a president to be effective, he/she needs to lead Congress to pass the legislation which fulfill his/her campaign promises. This isn't automatic for the President. We can see the trouble that Obama is having trying to pass Health Care reform, and that is WITH party control of both the Congress and Senate, and on an issue which everybody agrees needs reform. Yet you think Ron Paul will be able to get this done for the radical ideas which he supports? His goals cannot be accomplished by executive order.

You obviously didn't follow his campaign very well. I've been over this so many times and argued the same points with so many different people. In the end, once every one of them actually started to really pay attention, he had their vote.

His campaign was easily one of the most successful of the GOP, whereas, McCains was in shambles. Most money raised in a single day in history. He owned the net.

The only thing he didn't own, was the mainstream media. And they made sure he didn't get the exposure he should have. Shoot ... even my 85 yo father could see it. During the debates, whenever they allowed him to speak he kicked their ass.

As for getting things done, the issue of healthcare ... There's a good reason it's not getting done. It's a monstrosity they're trying to shove down America's throat full of crap they won't even subject themselves to.

Give a guy like Paul the public stage as POTUS, and I guarantee you his ideals would be given power through the ring of truth and freedom they convey.

Not parroting any line. I am simply stating what Ron Paul believes. Call it what ever you want, but recalling your military, and stopping foreign aid is classic isolationism.

You're saying all the things that tell me you are. You say things only his opposition has tried to paint. Like calling Paul an isolationist. That's baloney. Our military needs to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Shoot ... all the terrorists were Saudi's. And the public enemy number 1 Bin Laden is not even alive most likely. It's ridiculous until you admit ... we're not really there to stop terrorism. We're their for a wholly different purpose which is actually a pretty obvious one. The object has always been to further globalization and world government. And it comes from destabilizing the Middle East.

Hell ... even Collin Powel and General Wesley Clark admitted it. We were supposed to be in Iran by now but screwed the pooch and Afghanistan is a mess with our troops not even understanding what the heck the agenda is anymore.

Except that he was asked if he would launch an investigation into the US blowing up the twin towers, and he admitted that he would. Now, this may have been a slip of the tongue, but it's a pretty big one. I would certainly hope a US Congressman would be smart enough NOT to insulate that the US was behind 9/11, never mind a US Congressman trying to be elected as President of the United States.

That's a internet rumor. Ron Paul has never , EVER claimed he thought the USA blew up the towers.

See ... that's what I mean, you're parroting rumors created by detractors.

You should check out http://www.campaignforliberty.com/ ... it'll give you a much better understanding of where Paul really lies.

The members of campaignforliberty are the people we need to start replacing congress with, before it's too late. Whicn IMO it may already be.

[JustPete]

Originally Posted by revstriker

Yes, you are correct. We were never told how they got the explosives into the tower without anyone noticing. We were never told how they got all the people involved in planting the explosives to not come forward and talk about it. We were never told what happen to the people that were supposedly on the planes. We were never told where the footage of the plan hitting the tower was filmed, but my guess it was the same studio where they filmed the fake moon landing.

I'm not even sure why you're saying this stuff. Paul has never suggested America or the government blew up the towers ... and neither did I.

Originally Posted by revstriker

So again, where is the proof that he's been able to do anything? Isn't that what a Congressman is supposed to do; figure out what is right, and then work to get laws passed? Would you go to a doctor who was right about your diagnosis, but then refused to treat you? Would you want this person elevated and put in charge of a hospital?

Being right or wrong is irrelevant in evaluating his skill as a leader.

Ironically ... not only does he have an amazing record of bill introductions and voting record, but his bill to Audit the fed had 308 cosponsors. Not Bad for probably the most important bill of our lifetime.

So what did congress do with it? Per usual ... the cronyism kicked in from Obama's cabinet full of banking insiders and they gutted a bill that became veto proof.

Originally Posted by revstriker

Please list these "concrete solutions" to problems which Ron Paul has introduced as legislation and was able to champion into law? Or how about examples of bills he introduced that at least made it through committee, and to the floor for a vote?

The truth is hardly a "smear tactic".

Our system of government is broken. It's not about what's best for the people or protecting the constitution anymore.

[JustPete]

Originally Posted by Glasgow Gold

My oh my. Speaking of "right" vs. "wrong," you're joining a list of regularly posting Troofers (below, with affiliation) that aren't exactly regarded as the brain trust of OT.

Goliath27 - Mossad;
M1M2M3 - Unknown, but doesn't matter, as it would be incomprehensible anyway;
Motorwerkz - Bush "inside job";
JustPete - Unknown

So insults pass for intelligent debate these days?

Interesting.