Let's Talk About Ron Paul

[Money]

the post in bold is the factual truth

the people that say withdrawing from Iraq would be a disaster are the same liars who lied about everything else, about WMDs, about it being a cakewalk, etc.

you are promoting lies and fraud. you are pro-fraud, and pro-over 3000 dead troops and pro over one million dead iraqs. you are repeating programing instead of factual logic. you are programmed to support things that have nothing to do with you. the income tax has nothing to do with you, it provides you zero benefits. it goes to pay interest to a private bank.

if you admit it is information that everyone knows and you know it, why are you then promoting it? would you like Chinese soilders to shoot depleted uranium into your families bodies? or a Russian soldier to do waterboarding on you or slit your throat and drain your blood out of your body?

i HONESTY DONT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT DEAD IRAQIS, THEY WOULDNT CARE ABOUT US IM SURE

[jeem]

i like how you post your myspace because that way anyone can affirm their interpretation of you being a bigger tool than t0ne

[HeavenSent]

See how the journalists in Iraq are being controlled and even fired from their job for reporting the truth of war.

Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziZWTXvkIiA
Part 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DS3gNUDD_U
Part 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8QSRpnrWIE

..and how situations are being staged to gain support.


The following 1991 David Rockefeller quote to the Trilateral Commission illustrates further the bias in the media:

“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years."

Do some research on Rockefeller and how he OWNs ALL mainstream media.

Edit:> ...and you'll see why Ron Paul isn't getting the exposure he deserves.
..because he threatens the system of control & profit Rockefeller and those of the "Committee of 300" have on the mainstream.

[Epinephrine]

Where, at anywhere in my post, do I incline that we're doing good by policing?

Well generally when people talk about America being the 'world police' they are referring to the fact that America's military keeps the world peaceful and in order (which is what a police force usually does). And this usually further implies that the rest of the world doesn't want to do it, but they recognize it's good and are perfectly happy to let America shoulder the burden. Thus the opposition to America taking up the burden in the first place.

Maybe you aren't referring to what basically everyone who talks about this issue refers to, in which case I have no idea what you are talking about.

Edit: who's this paradise guy calling gullible? He doesn't even understand that the income tax is only roughly 30% of the income for our government. Couple that with the fact that we've got many unnecessary government agencies, reduce the size of the government some, reduce our massive army and you can easily get rid of the income tax. Think for a second, we didn't even have an income tax until the early 1900's. I almost can't believe how you can make such sweeping generalizations that are so wrong, especially when you've backed it up with no information, almost.

Double Edit: Ron Paul doesn't stand for universal health care. Sigh, why do I even bother. Educate yourself on a politician before you try to tell people that they're gullible and don't know anything about politics.

In 1900, life expectancy in America was 1/2 what it was today, clean water wasn't available to most people, neither was education available past grade school to most people. America had little influence in the world both economically and militarily, and was run by a few super wealthy men. In fact the government was so poor that a private citizen had to save the entire country from defaulting (JP Morgan). The elderly (if you lived that long) had absolutely no financial security beyond their immediate savings. Black people had little rights, women couldn't vote, and the rich trampled over the poor with little afterthought.

But of course they paid no income tax, what a great time!

[Chao.]

I fail to see the connection between being forced to pay an income tax and giving everyone their civil liberties. (Nice effort trying to tie them together them, though?)

[Money]

jeem

[HeavenSent]

In fact the government was so poor that a private citizen had to save the entire country from defaulting (JP Morgan).

But of course they paid no income tax, what a great time!

After the Bolshevik Revolution and the wholesale murder of the entire Russian royal family, Standard Oil of New Jersey brought 50% of the huge Caucasus oil field even though the property had theoretically been nationalized. In 1927, Standard Oil of New York built a refinery in Russia. Then Standard Oil concluded a deal to market Soviet Oil in Europe and floated a loan of $75 million to the Bolsheviks. Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg at the Kuhn Loeb Bank started a campaign for a central bank in the United States. They then helped the Rothschild's to manipulate the financial Panic of 1907.

Then, the panic of 1907 was used as an argument for having a central bank to prevent such occurrences. Paul Warburg told the Banking and Currency Committee: 'Let us have a national clearing house'."

The Federal Reserve Act was the brainchild of Baron Alfred Rothschild of London. The final version of the Act was decided on at a secret meeting at Jekyll Island Georgia, owned by J.P. Morgan. Present at the meeting were; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant secretary of the Treasury, Senator Nelson Aldrich, Frank Vanderlip, President of Kuhn Loeb and Co., Henry Davidson, Senior Partner of J.P. Morgan Bank, Charles Norton, President of Morgan's First National of New York, Paul Warburg, Partner in Khun Loeb and Co. and Benjamin Strong, President of Morgan's Bankers Trust Co.
http://www.redicecreations.com/speci...redshield.html

Americans knew from history the dangers that direct taxation posed to individual liberty. If public officials — whether democratically elected or not — had the power to directly confiscate the wealth of the people through direct taxation, there would never be a stopping point. Americans knew that taxation would never cease to rise because the needs and crises of government are always never-ending.

Thus, from the start in 1787, the national government's operations were funded by indirect taxation — the tariff — and even then, the total tax probably never exceeded about one percent of people's income.

Why didn't the national politicians and bureaucrats simply impose income taxation on the American people? Because everyone understood that the government's powers emanated from the Constitution — the document that the American people had used to bring the national government into existence. If a power was not listed in the Constitution, the national government was not permitted to exercise it. And the power to levy an income tax was simply not listed. http://www.fff.org/freedom/0496a.asp

The Federal Reserve Act, designed to regulate bankers, was written on a private island off the coast of Georgia in 1910 by bankers representing the JP Morgan, Rockefeller, and Rothschild interests. This allegedly gave the top international bankers the power to control and manipulate the United States economy. http://www.answers.com/topic/new-world-order-conspiracy

[Galleleo]

Actually Spider, I think now is probably a good time to bring forward a type of candidate that has never been elected (woman/African-American). At least I would THINK (just basing on how I would vote/react to the current situation) is that as long as you bring forth a good enough program, that the republicans have fucked up more than enough these past 4 years that being a woman or African-American doesn't matter that much in this election period.

In other words, if the Republicans would have had a better 8 year period of leading the country, I think the democrats would hurt more on putting forward a woman or African-American candidate than now.

I hope you could follow what I meant..

[Epinephrine]

I fail to see the connection between being forced to pay an income tax and giving everyone their civil liberties. (Nice effort trying to tie them together them, though?)

My point is, these people support Ron Paul because his policies support 'things that are in the constitution' not 'stuff that was added later'. Well civil rights wasn't in the constitution, nor was women's right to vote either.

So their argument that this return to the past is somehow 'better' is pretty flawed, unless of course they support taking away those rights as well...

[DoTheFandango]

Ron Paul brain washes people. Go look at his forums, its like fucking Scientology.

[Vatican Assassin]

So this means that the Industrial Revolution was restoring the world to an older order? As in we once had factories then those damn farmboys took over and destroyed them all. So we had a revolution to restore them?

ya social revolutions and technological ones are not quite the same thing

[Vatican Assassin]

Dude, the only 'policing' that the US does is directly for it's own interests such as protecting it's own commercial interests (the US Navy), or it's own political interests (i.e. bases in South Korea, Japan, Iraq, etc etc etc). It's not for anyone else's benefit.

The only time it is benefiting someone else, are the humanitarian missions like Kosovo and Rwanda, but those are demanded by the voting public in America.

so US only helps itself except the times when it doesn't, when the people want to help others, and your point is?

[Vatican Assassin]

I've never heard of this Ron Paul guy, then all of a sudden a bunch of TWers are talking about him. Many of the TWers who are talking about him are the ones who have, at times, proven themselves to be batshit insane. So here is my question, is this another third party whack job snowballing a tiny minority of the American people again? Or is this guy semi-reasonable and running because the current crop of Republicans are fucking insane, and the Democrats are pinning their hopes on a woman and a black guy, both demographics that have never been elected President?

I hate to be kinda changing the subject, but why are the front runners for the Democratic nomination a woman and an African-American fellow? I'm all for diversity and shit. I think it's rather stupid that to this point America has never had a black or woman President. I think it's stupid that my country has never elected a woman Prime Minister. But, seriously, if you're trying to get rid of a powerful Republican Party, why do you not find a slightly older than middle aged white guy who is respected, relatively free of controversy, experienced, and moderate? Just to get the crazies (republicans) the hell out of the white house? I don't understand this. It's like recruiting a bunch of prospects to try to win the stanley cup, or the super bowl, or whatever. It's a great long term idea, but to actually win in the here and now, you need to go with what works. Sigh.

At least Rudy Guiliani (whatever) is a pissant. Don't you see him doing the "bird peck" with this right fucking hand all the time? You'd let a fucking tool like that run your country? Well, obviously not you guys because you want to vote for whoever the fuck Ron Paul is, but whatever.

....

Right on.

are you really making fun of a canidate without even bothering to look up what party he's in, stop watsing our time with your valueless opinions

[Vatican Assassin]

anyone who believes what Ron Paul has to say is gullible and has little to no political experience. Anyone who says they will end income tax, bring troops home, raise the value of the American Dollar, end illegal immigration, lower taxes WHILE shrinking the national debt, universal health care. Come On. How can he intend to do all this. If he came out this revolutionary idea to solve every single one of Americas Problems, i'd die of happiness.

ok so whats your political experience? i have none so i do the best i can do with the common sense i was given and the research i have time to do. ending income tax: a little research into this shows that before the 50's there was no income tax, and we happened to be able to pay for everything we needed until then. further research shows that since we borrow our money from a private entity, the federal reserve, that income tax is primarily spent on the interest. schools, cops, hospitals, armies, all those things we pay for come from state, sales, property, and the hundreds of other taxes that we pay and don't think about. upkeeping roads? thats paid for in full by gasoline taxes. returning the power to print money to the government and putting it back on the gold standard so that it actually stands for something other than the paper its printed on would raise the price of the dollar. all these problems of ours have come so easily and recently that maybe it would be just as easy to fix them if you just thought why we have them in the first place.

[Vatican Assassin]

Well generally when people talk about America being the 'world police' they are referring to the fact that America's military keeps the world peaceful and in order (which is what a police force usually does). And this usually further implies that the rest of the world doesn't want to do it, but they recognize it's good and are perfectly happy to let America shoulder the burden. Thus the opposition to America taking up the burden in the first place.

Maybe you aren't referring to what basically everyone who talks about this issue refers to, in which case I have no idea what you are talking about.



In 1900, life expectancy in America was 1/2 what it was today, clean water wasn't available to most people, neither was education available past grade school to most people. America had little influence in the world both economically and militarily, and was run by a few super wealthy men. In fact the government was so poor that a private citizen had to save the entire country from defaulting (JP Morgan). The elderly (if you lived that long) had absolutely no financial security beyond their immediate savings. Black people had little rights, women couldn't vote, and the rich trampled over the poor with little afterthought.

But of course they paid no income tax, what a great time!

you don't care what he's talking about, you just voice your opinion to what you think most people tend to talk about, thats valuable input thanks. if you are planning on writing a thesis paper about how income tax fixed all of those problems have a great time leaving out the civil rights movement, the womens suffrage, and all of the other people who gave sweat blood and tears to earn their rights.