Ron Paul simple did not get elected because the elite did not want him .deal with it.

What you say is "truth" is primarily personal opinion. But this is a free country, you are allowed to believe whatever you want.

Just don't expect me to buy into Candy Rock Mountain myself.

 

It's a pretty good explanation of why Ron Paul lost so decisively, and his supporters were amongst the most politically loyal people in the country.

If ever a politician deserved the "messiah" label it was Ron Paul, not Obama.

 

RP only had two things going for him among Democrats. He was against the war in Iraq. Unfortunately, he was otherwise clueless on the proper use of military force and would be a disaster if we ever did have a military emergency.

Then there is the weed.

That may also account for the conspiracy delusions.

 

Libertarians are the far fringes of both parties. On the Left you have the Anarchists, who want freedom to do whatever you want, even Heroin on street corners, as long as everything they really wanted was free.

Then on the Right they tend to be anti-government nutters. Hate the Supreme Court, hate the Treasury Department, hate such "annoying" things as the Clean Air Act, Department of Defense, and anything else even close to "Regulation". There should be no taxes beyond a local level, and we should all return to living as we did in the early 20th century, with sewage being pumped into the rivers and untreated pollution fouling the skies. There should be no currency other then gold or silver coins, because Jews corrupt the financial system for their own gain.

Myself, I tend to think 80% of Libertarians are nutcases. Yes, there are the 20% fringe ones who are more moderate, but those on the edges are just simply off their rockers (on both sides of the political fence). This is why I do not associate myself with the "Tea Party" movement. I do like a lot of the ideas of that movement, but it has become so infused with Libertarians that the thought of being associated with them makes me ill.

 

They were both "Messiahs" in a way.

Obama was clearly the messiah for the masses who are the typical voter... uneducated, no understanding of politics and willingly gets spoon fed BS from the TV. It was literally vote between having [White] Bush II or [Black] Bush II when it came down to it...

 

From this post you don't enjoy "Wars" but, you believe in Imperialism because having a strong military force across multiple countries is required. You consider asking questions and wondering if what was said was true is a form of delusions... May we all be as simple minded and think the world was still flat!

 

This post reeks of blah blah blah my opinion is best and everyone else is crazy who isn't a typical Republican/Democrat.

 

No, not quite. With Ron Paul's fans it is more about the message, than the man, although we respect the man. Do you remember when people with shows such as Stern, Hannity, Adam Kokesh interviewed Obama supporters? Many of the supporters followed him in as a cult like persona or a rock star. It was just the cool thing to do. When asked about his policies, many didn't know. Stern's people even asked Obama supporters how they felt about Obama being pro-gun and pro-life as well as other conservative principles. They just nodded and said things to the effect of they were down with that. I would bet if you asked any Ron Paul supporter why they supported him, they could name at least one policy or belief if not several or many.

And when you say Ron Paul lost decisively, I'm sorry, but I'm at a loss. I don't know what you are referring to. Is it the nomination? If so, read up on the events at the convention, if you can call it that, and get back with me.

 

Are you a fear mongering Democrat? I suppose we also wanted to push granny down the stairs, starve the kids, and if you elect any of us, another black church will burn.

 

I'll address the weed first and then move on to the more important issue which is military force. It is not so much being pro-Marijuana as people claim. He has many times publicly discouraged drug use. The libertarian position is the government does not have the right to tell someone what to put in their own body. I can see this. If a guy is sitting on his couch smoking a joint, he is harming himself, but not anybody else. If he drives, he is potentially harming someone else, just as if someone gets behind the wheel after consuming alcohol. I have never used Marijuana or any other recreational drug other than a moderate and occasional use of alcohol. If I have a shot of rum on my couch, I have not hurt anybody. I refuse to drive even a few blocks to the store, even if I have only had a sip of alcohol. However, as I have not harmed anyone, if I did, for the sake of arguement, get behind the wheel, I would then put myself in a position where I could potentially harm someone. I rarely drink in public, if ever, but if I ever did, I would not be carrying a firearm.

But, I believe Ron Paul's position is even moreso being against the concept of federal law and supporting laws being on the state level instead. I would have to double check on this, but I believe if a state passed a law prohibiting marijuana use, rather than a federal law prohibiting, Paul would support the state prohibition. Again, I believe it is more the desire for laws to be on a state level rather than a federal level with Paul.

As far as military force goes, I posted the bill below which was sponsored by Ron Paul shortly after the 9-11 attacks. He supported going after Al-Qaeda and even supported putting a bounty on the head of OBL dead or alive as well as the Constitutional actions of letters of Marque and Reprisal. Paul is against military action in which we are acting as global police and working in global interests. He is against military action in which soldiers are deployed and put in harm's way for any interest other than protecting the United States. He is against going to war without a Constitutional declaration, remaining deployed in a perpetual war with no end in sight in the name of nation building. However, he very much supports war in the defense of the U.S. Think about this, if we are spread all over the world in global interests, we are spread thin. His way coincides with the desires of the founders and actually strengthens are defense.

This is from Paul’s sponsored bill after 9-11 and he also voted in support of going after Al-Qaeda. Check out he language used.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) That the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 upon the United States were acts of air piracy contrary to the law of nations.
(2) That the terrorist attacks were acts of war perpetrated by enemy belligerents to destroy the sovereign independence of the United States of America contrary to the law of nations.
(3) That the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks were actively aided and abetted by a conspiracy involving one Osama bin Laden and others known and unknown, either knowingly and actively affiliated with a terrorist organization known as al Qaeda or knowingly and actively conspiring with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, both of whom are dedicated to the destruction of the United States of America as a sovereign and independent nation.
(4) That the al Qaeda conspiracy is a continuing one among Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and others known and unknown with plans to commit additional acts of air piracy and other similar acts of war upon the United States of America and her people.
(5) That the act of war committed on September 11, 2001, by the al Qaeda conspirators, and the other acts of war planned by the al Qaeda conspirators, are contrary to the law of nations.
(6) That under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, Congress has the power to grant letters of marque and reprisal to punish, deter, and prevent the piratical aggressions and depredations and other acts of war of the al Qaeda conspirators.
SEC. 3. AUTHORITY OF PRESIDENT.
(a) The President of the United States is authorized and requested to commission, under officially issued letters of marque and reprisal, so many of privately armed and equipped persons and entities as, in his judgment, the service may require, with suitable instructions to the leaders thereof, to employ all means reasonably necessary to seize outside the geographic boundaries of the United States and its territories the person and property of Osama bin Laden, of any al Qaeda co-conspirator, and of any conspirator with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda who are responsible for the air piratical aggressions and depredations perpetrated upon the United States of America on September 11, 2001, and for any planned future air piratical aggressions and depredations or other acts of war upon the United States of America and her people.
(b) The President of the United States is authorized to place a money bounty, drawn in his discretion from the $40,000,000,000 appropriated on September 14, 2001, in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorists Attacks on the United States or from private sources, for the capture, alive or dead, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator responsible for the act of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001, under the authority of any letter of marque or reprisal issued under this Act.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3076:

 

The existence of PNAC and their documented goals as well as our documented involvement in regime changes of Iraq, Egypt, Libya and current efforts in the regime change in Syria are a matter of my personal opinion? Wow, that's interesting. A lot of people are talking throughout the nation of my personal opinion and I don't even have my own show!

 

He ran once as a Libertarian and twice as a Republican and was a Repubican congressman. Politically and philisophically, I believe he is a conservative with libertarian leanings, i.e., a true conservative or a conservative of the Old Right, which actually does fit the description of a conservative moreso than that of the New Right or Neoconservatives.

Anyway, the word libertarian is not as evil as you might believe. Conservatives get scared off when they believe the first five letters refer to liberal. It actually refers to liberty. Liberty isn't such a bad thing. Is it?

Do you believe McCain, Bush, Graham, and Romney are conservatives?

 

Actually, I am very much on the "Right Wing". Many here place me just to the right of Attila the Hun if you ask them.

Which tells me that you are simply attacking without thought and without even reading or understanding what I said. Is it any wonder that so many on the Right reject him and his supporters?

Errr, the PNAC has been gone for 7 years now. Amazing how the Project for the New American Century (a Conservative think tank) could be so danged influential in the actions of a Democratic President.

And the conspiracies just keep adding up.

Sorry, I see him as no different then George Wallace Jr. He would run under any party that he thought would give him the best chance. If that was Independent, Libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Dixiecrat, or CPUSA I do not think really matters. He is a divisive individual, who constantly spews out an "Us Vs. Them" message, and treats (and encourages his minions to treat) anybody that does not agree with them as an enemy.

And then people wonder why I reject him.

 

I never said PNAC had anything to do with the actions of our current president. PNAC is what was influential in the invasion of Iraq. Obama's foreign policy has been very interventionist as well. So, the point is, Democrats and Republicans have been very interventionist and are similar in foreign policy. Maybe you condemn it when a Democrat is in office and support it when a Republican is in office. The capital R does not make one a conservative and it does not automatically make one a defender of liberty. Both parties have lost their way and are not anywhere near the ideals of our founders.

Regarding the currency and the banks, the issue is the Fed is a central bank (Jefferson and many of the founders opposed the idea of central banks), which print money with no commodity backing causing inflation, while they also manipulate the interest rates. It isn't so much that gold needs to be the currency, although it wouldn't be a bad idea. Paper money could probably work with commodity backing, but the ending of the gold standard was disastrous.

 

There are clueless people that support every candidate, people with camera crews can easily find them and use them for comedy routines.
They could have made the same type of interview sketch with Romney Supporters or with ROn Paul supporters, although it would have been harder to find Ron Paul supporters.
The did Obama, because he had the most supporters, there were the easiest to find, and among the supporters of any candidate there will be the clueless, and they are easiest to find among the supporters of the most popular candidate. Howard Stern is doing interviews in NYC, something like 70% of the people on the street are going to be Obama supporters, and if he goes to black neighborhoods, something like 98% are going to be Obama supporters.


I say Ron Paul lost decisively, because there was never a point where he was ever really in contention for the nomination.
The convention was going to go for Romney on the first ballot, whether or not Ron Paul was nominated or made a speech, he was never close to being the nominee.

 

Do you honestly think that having a commodity backing would help prevent inflation?

Oh my goodness, are you for real? Do you even know why we got off of the "Gold Standard" in the first place, as well as pretty much every nation on the planet?

Think about this: What would happen to the value of your currency if the value of the backing commodity rose say... 100%. What if that commodity rose 200%? And no, it is not that your money buys more, it is that inflation automatically kicks in, and your currency becomes to valuable that it looses it's buying power. This was one of the major factors behind the problems during the Great Depression. Our money was still tied to gold, and the price of gold rose. So the already staggering economy then saw the currency rise in value but the buying power of that money fall.

And what happens if your commodity falls by 25%? 50%? That's right, your currency looses value.

We got off of the Gold Standard and Silver Standard for very good reasons. It is simply insanity to have your currency tied to a commodity that can rise and fall in value at the whim of others. All it would take to wreck your economy is other nations manipulating that commodity with their own supplies of the same thing.

Just imagine if we had tied our currency to oil. Now some people think that would make sense, but I call it insanity. In the last decade we have seen the price of gasoline range from $1 a gallon up to over $5 a gallon. And not once but several times. Now imagine how that would impact our economy if that was the basemark for our currency. Chaos, pure and simple chaos.

But hey, the Federal Reserve is a convenient target. And it is also full of Jews, a group a lot of people are suspicious of, so it is a win-win situation to blame them for all sorts of things. And simply sucker in the masses by saying things like "Gold", that has been getting people moving for thousands of years now. And you just have to hope that the people listening to you never figure out what is really being said, because then everything would collapse like a giant deck of cards.

**LAUGHS**

Paper money with commodity backing, I never realized so many people were so naïve about how money and economics works. I guess the people believe that also can't understand how no money is lost during a stock market crash, like that of 1929.

 

Obama was also by far the preference for the typical PhD, the typical scientist, the typical engineer, the typical economist, the typical political reporter who was well informed on all the issues. Ron Paul had a following that was different from all the other candidates, they were a small but very dedicated following, who would show up in large numbers for straw polls, the higher the barrier to voting, the better Ron Paul did. Because his followers would stand outside in the freezing weather for hours waiting to get into a straw poll.
But he never had the numbers among Republicans to be a serious candidate.

 

I should have typed "and/or" because those professions you listed include gullible idiots into their mix. Loving the absolutely no change direction!

 

I think, too, that people noticed the number of bat crap crazy anarcho-nihilists who showed up at every public event, political or not, to support him.

 

you are making way too much sense for him to comprehend.hee hee.

 

more than likely he does with his logic he shows.hee hee.

He doesnt get it that Paul is a RINO.He switched to the libertarin party after serving in the reagan administration and seeing how corrupt reagan and both parties were wanting no part of it.I try to speell this out to them dummies style that he only ran under the republican ticket since the independent never wins but that never registers with them.hee hee,cant reason with someone who only sees what they WANT to see and is close minded.

- - - Updated - - -

good job giving him a first class education.gives standing ovation.

 

hard to be a serious candidate when the establishment sabotages your strategy to win the nomination making up last minute rule changes and rigging the ohio primarys for romney which was critical for his nomination. why do so many people here not know how to read?

 

again you failed to read my opening post on this thread.please do so.not just the thread title. it looks you didn't even bother to read that either..

 

this thread here exposes how there is no difference between Bush,Obama and Romney which is why the apologists for these murderosu scumbags will ignore it of course just like they have every fact I made in this thread why Paul did not get elected evading them.

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...etting-elected-good-reason-not-vote-them.html

 

since the romney/Obama apologists keep ignoring MY posts,then maybe they will listen to THIS guy.Its a four partt video series.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbf3iaEbAuY&list=PL41B48841A41B3212