Political Prophets: The Truth Confined

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once its realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy."
- Ron Paul

In 2002, a much younger looking Ron Paul made the following statement in congress where he made predictions for the following years after the infamous 9/11 terrorist attacks. Much of it spot on. Ron Paul is beyond just being a good politician, the man is not just another cunning politician, he reaches into the depths of wisdom and brings out the truth many have tried to confine for years.



"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
- Thomas Jefferson

Someone air this during the superbowl, then most of America will see the truth.

(Or during Pacquiao vs Mayweather,if it ever happens

reply to post by ElOmen


Thats funny you bring that up because I was thinking last night how would be bring about 50,000 people together at once fighting for one cause and then my television told me the attendance of the football game and the light bulb came on above my head.

Its sad we can get 50,00+ people to attend sporting events on a weekly basis and pay too much for a ticket and can't find 1,000 to take some time out of there day to create a movement for an actual cause outside of entertainment.

Perhaps people all over the world rent out blimps at the same day around same time....with a message on the blimps ...I'm sure the media wouldn't just ignore this.

But that's just my idea and getting off topic maybe ill start a thread on this if there isn't one...

Back to the video thank you for posting it. Has a lot of good info that will help Ron Paul voters understand his perspective on gov.

In 2002 I don't even remember Romney or Santorum and yet they are get more media coverage.

It begs the question, at what point does one decide that track history and not political parade, is how we should vote?

I've run across something that bothers me, maybe some of you can help. There is a lot of talk about Paul's "goodness" (I don't know what word I want) in this thread.

Govtrack gave me two statistics that have me a little worried. One is that Rep. Paul has sponsored 421 bills and one has been enacted. That makes me wonder about his ability to work with Congress in getting some of his priorities passed. Many, if not most, of the wonderful things he is promising will require Congress to go along with him.

The other is that of the 535 members of Congress he has the 9th highest percentage of missed votes, and that includes Rep. Giffords, who was shot. Just in general, that seems to be a bad sign.

Help, please.

reply to post by charles1952


Would you rather have Ron Paul who can't get a bill past congress because they don't agree what is right for the majority of americans and non americans OR a president that is going to continue to easily pass bills like NDAA?

I would guess his high number of votes missed is due to a combination of things: a) the length of time he has been in congress compared to the mostly "young" congressmen and women b) he did not agree with majority and knew beforehand the outcome of the bill with or without his vote and c) some unknown factor. Paul is by far the wiset and most logical canidate, what he has or has not done I'm sure has good reason.

hope this helps

reply to post by ImmortalThought

Dear ImmortalThought,

Thank you very much, it does help.

Although your answer leaves me a little discouraged, I might have misunderstood. Is our choice really between 1) Ron Paul who can't get a bill past congress, or
2) a president that is going to continue to easily pass bills like NDAA?
Neither one of those sounds very good.

Changes have to be made. Does Paul have to be able to work with Congress, or will they stop him. Sometimes I think electing Paul will make people feel good for awhile, then make them feel really lousy when he can't get the changes through that he wants.

Sorry, to be such a rain cloud, but I see a lot of ways for the election to go bad and not many for a good result.

But, thanks again for your response, it did help.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


It has always been my perspective that we will need more then Ron Paul to make a change.

History is never made by ONE person, its made by the masses that is clear.

George Washington by himself would have been shot and killed in Valley Forge if it wasn't for others.
Martin Luther King Jr. would have been hung if it wasn't for the 999,999 others that marched on Washington.
Even Jesus Christ (whever real or not) had 12 disciples.

But, you surround these moral leaders with moral followers (leaders in their own right) and the movement can become successful. Our future depends on all of us, until then we can't make great change.

My vote for Paul is because he is the only person worth wasting the time. He at least gives the people a chance to to change this system. We can't depend on products of the system that benefit from this system to change the system.

Ron Paul is a torch bearer, if the old man can do, then the youth can certaintly take responsibilty of their lives and the change for humanity. We can no longer isolate ourselves