Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Little Fish

Who do you want for US president ?

121 posts in this topic

Honest%20Ron%20Paul.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that settles it for me. :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron Paul has the luxury of saying these things as he is in opposition (sort of.)

It wouldn't last ten minutes if he was elected...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron Paul has the luxury of saying these things as he is in opposition (sort of.)

It wouldn't last ten minutes if he was elected...

Who do you want for US president ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm... still Obama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see your posted image here at work but my answer is definitely 'NONE OF THE ABOVE'.

I will probably end up voting for Obama even though I'm not fond of him. That decision would be based on the fact that he now has roughly 4 years experience being president and nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who do you want for US president ?

Any of the fictional ones, preferably Laura Roslin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Roslin

Following that, James Cromwell did a pretty good job too... As did Harrison Ford when he was on that plane.

________________

The reason I made my comment before is because we have this thing in the UK called a 'Nick Clegg,' it's a turncoat kind of creature that does one thing before an election and another afterwards... You Ron Paul fanboys would do well to look him up.

Edited by Wyvernkeeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any of the fictional ones, preferably Laura Roslin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Roslin

Following that, James Cromwell did a pretty good job too... As did Harrison Ford when he was on that plane.

________________

The reason I made my comment before is because we have this thing in the UK called a 'Nick Clegg,' it's a turncoat kind of creature that does one thing before an election and another afterwards... You Ron Paul fanboys would do well to look him up.

I looked up Ron Paul, and at the least, the guy deserves a shot far more then anyone on either side. At the VERY least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked up Ron Paul, and at the least, the guy deserves a shot far more then anyone on either side. At the VERY least.

I meant you to look up Clegg... What I am trying to describe is that career opposition politicians are often forced to renege on their promises once they have to deal with the realities of government.

How on Earth do you expect an anti-corporate politician to achieve anything in the most corporate nation on the planet without comprimising his ideals?

Now if RP ran as the republican vice-candidate, then I think Obama might have a problem.. If RP ran as the presidential candidate then Obama's victory is guaranteed.

Edited by Wyvernkeeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant you to look up Clegg... What I am trying to describe is that career opposition politicians are often forced to renege on their promises once they have to deal with the realities of government.

I know what you meant. No need. You just described every polititian I have ever known, other then a very small handful. The only difference between our views is I dont think they were forced at all. Nor do I think you have to do a whole lot of digging to discover why. Begining with finding out who funded said polititions campaign.

How on Earth do you expect an anti-corporate politician to achieve anything in the most corporate nation on the planet without comprimising his ideals?

How do you expect a government who's the most corperate nation on the planet to serve the people over the corperations? Ron Paul isnt the finnal answer to all our problems. Youd be a fool to believe that. But it is a great start. Here are the things I expect out of a Ron Paul administration.

Day 1 Call out the order to bring all troops, in peace, or at war, to come home. He is the commander and chief of all armed forces, and there isnt a declaration of war by our congress in any conflict we are engaged in. This would be within his full power.

Still day one, with his next breath he would order a full audit of the federal reserve.

These are the top priorities cause they would be fully within his power. They will also be most effective to giving a hard punch to the establishment. Then there is the side benefits.

States that legalized medical pot would be left alone. States that legalized gay marrage would be left alone. Well I could go on all day about the civil liberties that would be restored simply by not funding such federal government programs.

Youd have a man who would tell the people the truth and name names.

And last but not least, we'd have a man at the brake as they continue to try and steal our wealth, and our liberties through legislation, bailouts, and unfair trade agreements.

Edited by preacherman76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant you to look up Clegg... What I am trying to describe is that career opposition politicians are often forced to renege on their promises once they have to deal with the realities of government.

How on Earth do you expect an anti-corporate politician to achieve anything in the most corporate nation on the planet without comprimising his ideals?

Now if RP ran as the republican vice-candidate, then I think Obama might have a problem.. If RP ran as the presidential candidate then Obama's victory is guaranteed.

Rigid Libertarians like the Paul Bots do not see their partisanship or political intransigence. They see a large, broken mess and feel that their guy is some white knight who can ride in and save the day. The one benefit I can see to a Paul presidency is that it would completely rip the blinders off the people. They would see former foes join forces to defeat Paul's initiatives so they could maintain the status quo. If America did not face desperate times I would love to see that show...but there is no time for that just now.

Paul can compromise to move legislation or he can have his base of support. He cannot do both.

He would be the hand holding the veto pen - and that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul can compromise to move legislation or he can have his base of support. He cannot do both.

He would be the hand holding the veto pen - and that's all.

I'll ignore the insult.

Paul isnt trying to pass legislation. Passing legislation has been the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honest%20Ron%20Paul.jpg

LOVES IT!

:tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They would see former foes join forces to defeat Paul's initiatives so they could maintain the status quo. If America did not face desperate times I would love to see that show...but there is no time for that just now.

The "foes" are already joined together at the hip. Maybe you missed the picture at the top of the thread?

So even though you actually think there are profound differences between Barack Obama and yourself, please take me down the slope of "defeating Paul's initiatives" so I can see what that looks like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you meant. No need. You just described every polititian I have ever known, other then a very small handful. The only difference between our views is I dont think they were forced at all. Nor do I think you have to do a whole lot of digging to discover why. Begining with finding out who funded said polititions campaign.

How do you expect a government who's the most corperate nation on the planet to serve the people over the corperations? Ron Paul isnt the finnal answer to all our problems. Youd be a fool to believe that. But it is a great start. Here are the things I expect out of a Ron Paul administration.

Day 1 Call out the order to bring all troops, in peace, or at war, to come home. He is the commander and chief of all armed forces, and there isnt a declaration of war by our congress in any conflict we are engaged in. This would be within his full power.

Still day one, with his next breath he would order a full audit of the federal reserve.

These are the top priorities cause they would be fully within his power. They will also be most effective to giving a hard punch to the establishment. Then there is the side benefits.

States that legalized medical pot would be left alone. States that legalized gay marrage would be left alone. Well I could go on all day about the civil liberties that would be restored simply by not funding such federal government programs.

Youd have a man who would tell the people the truth and name names.

And last but not least, we'd have a man at the brake as they continue to try and steal our wealth, and our liberties through legislation, bailouts, and unfair trade agreements.

This would all be very nice and admirable, but if he did all that on day 1, you can bet your life that on day 2 somebody in the MI complex would have signed a contract to take him down.

Do not underestimate the dirty tricks that would be played if RP ever came close to getting any real power. Number one, would be some kind of drudged up sex scandal... Even if you are innocent, nobody can ever restore their name from something like that.. Think about the reputation of Assange.

Number 2) probably complete obstinancy on the part of the bought and paid for legislature, like what Obama has had from the Republican controlled chambers for the past few years.

Number 3) The hit.

RP would just be the new face of those that stole your wealth and liberty etc... In fact, a la Nick Clegg, he would probably allow them to get away with it even easier as those being fleeced would believe they had some kind of protector in government, until suddenly they had nothing left at all. In the UK we have come to realise that every time David Cameron wheels out his pet Clegg, you can bet something bad is happening.. DC's logic is that if Clegg can be made to put forward something, that will neutralise the opposition... Luckily, Clegg's reputation has become so toxic that people actually wake up when he talks, rather than go to sleep as intended.

Edited by Wyvernkeeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron Paul has the luxury of saying these things as he is in opposition (sort of.)

It wouldn't last ten minutes if he was elected...

I agree.

Look at the current President and all of his lofty rhetoric about change and 4 years later he's not much different than the guy he replaced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would all be very nice and admirable, but if he did all that on day 1, you can bet your life that on day 2 somebody in the MI complex would have signed a contract to take him down.

Do not underestimate the dirty tricks that would be played if RP ever came close to getting any real power. Number one, would be some kind of drudged up sex scandal... Even if you are innocent, nobody can ever restore their name from something like that.. Think about the reputation of Assange.

Number 2) probably complete obstinancy on the part of the bought and paid for legislature, like what Obama has had from the Republican controlled chambers for the past few years.

Number 3) The hit.

Granted this, it makes Ron Paul even more important and makes me want Ron Paul for President. Exposing just how bad the establishment is, would be much of the point. The bully pulpit is another great power of the President, it's not just the pen.

Nothing wrong with Assange's reputation. He went from veritable unknown to international hero. You must be one of those people who thinks if the truth hurts the policy, hide the truth. So you sacrifice truth for policy when the truth is why the policy shouldn't exist in the first place.

Even Jesus isn't liked very much anymore by many people. If you become big you become hated. Finding someone who's universally liked is impossible. Obama also had many ridiculous attacks against him that went nowhere, including armed burglars/assailants. You can make the case that the hit on Paul would be from the inside so to actually be successfully carried out. But there again, if people running this country are so evil and sold out that they'd resort to such a thing then they need to be exposed and thrown behind bars. President Paul would shine a bright light. Another reason to vote for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree.

Look at the current President and all of his lofty rhetoric about change and 4 years later he's not much different than the guy he replaced.

You might agree if you're in total ignorance of his record, yeah.

As if because he would become far more powerful, suddenly he'd abandon everything he's been elected 12 times to do.

All Obama has is rhetoric. If you want to find someone more comparable to that, look at the other men on the chart above. Ron Paul is once again the sole exclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with Assange's reputation. He went from veritable unknown to international hero. You must be one of those people who thinks if the truth hurts the policy, hide the truth. So you sacrifice truth for policy when the truth is why the policy shouldn't exist in the first place.

I'm speaking about the accusations of rape, which certainly did not make him an 'international hero.'

This came to most people's attention after the whistleblowing and enabled the tabloids to condemn anything worthwhile he had previously done and paint him as some kind of silver-haired mysogonist archvillain. I personally don't think it undermined his points, but what it did do was undermine his credibility - in much the way that Dominic Strauss Kahn has little authority since his own scandals have been revealed.

With regards to Paul, it wouldn't have to be a hit.. If they just dug up one dodgy incident from his past, (which everybody without exception has,) it wouldn't even have to be rape, but it would be enough to either blackmail him or to at least provide ammunition for slander. They did it to Assange, they would certainly pull the same tricks on Paul.

Edited by Wyvernkeeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So an "Honest" Candidate just means saying NO to everything, then? It's very easy to say NO to everything; what takes skill is knowing when sometimes you have to say YES.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, the whole reason that people are able to indulge in these dreams is because they know that there's virtually zero chance of this ever actually coming true, so they know there's little chance of being disappointed. I suppose that's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm speaking about the accusations of rape, which certainly did not make him an 'international hero.'

This came to most people's attention after the whistleblowing and enabled the tabloids to condemn anything worthwhile he had previously done and paint him as some kind of silver-haired mysogonist archvillain. I personally don't think it undermined his points, but what it did do was undermine his credibility - in much the way that Dominic Strauss Kahn has little authority since his own scandals have been revealed.

With regards to Paul, it wouldn't have to be a hit.. If they just dug up one dodgy incident from his past, (which everybody without exception has,) it wouldn't even have to be rape, but it would be enough to either blackmail him or to at least provide ammunition for slander. They did it to Assange, they would certainly pull the same tricks on Paul.

Yes you're speaking of the smear job that people have to resort to when someone starts speaking too much truth to power.

Of course people will pull tricks on Paul. Politics and the way things have always been are no reason not to elect the reformer of those things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So an "Honest" Candidate just means saying NO to everything, then? It's very easy to say NO to everything; what takes skill is knowing when sometimes you have to say YES.

Skill in breaking the law you mean? If it's not authorized in the Constitution, it's left to the States or the people. Why can't bipartisan government faithful figure that out?

If you have a big stinking problem with the Constitution, change the Constitution. Don't sweep it under the rug and activate Wonder Twin powers that don't exist and then act like the other guy's crazy or unelectable just for pointing it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean (for instance) Foreign Aid, or even Wars sometimes, are not Constitutional? And every single one of all those acronyms, they're all illegal as well? The point os that Mr. P seems to be recommended purely on the basis that he won't actually do anything at all; and while that may well be admirable in many ways, it seems that what his Admirers would actually like most of all is no Government at all. Because no Government would get very far if there was no taxation at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.