How to Save America (the ron paul way)

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

Originally posted by xpert11
EastCoastKid I could just see you starting a group called Republicans for Al Gore the only problem would be that you would be the only member.

And yet, there would be an army of Independents and Dems behind this cause.

There are a lot of disaffected Republicans out there who want change. They'd go for Gore. He's been around a few blocks.

Originally posted by The Cyfre


Gore has the environment issue, and that's a really nice talking point. Or not. No president has been elected on the environment. It gets you through the primaries nicely, but leaves you with nothing in the general.

Gore may or may not have passion for other areas of presidential interest, i don't know his stance on the issues. Why? Because he's boring! He doesn't have any charisma, none at all. Everyone admires him for An Inconvenient Truth, but he's preaching to the choir. He isn't changing minds. If he isn't changing minds, then he's just distracting voters from a quality candidate.

Al Gore is the most experienced person in the entire field of contenders for '08. He is a Vietnam veteran (enlisted), a journalist, a congressman, as Senator and a two term vice president. Now you can add to that Global Warming activitst to the world, Oscar winner and hopefully a NObel Prize winner.

Al Gore really needs to run for prezident. He could actually turn things around.

"...Turn things around."

What the heck could he do, aside from screwing our economy even worse?

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Al Gore is the most experienced person in the entire field of contenders for '08. He is a Vietnam veteran (enlisted), a journalist, a congressman, as Senator and a two term vice president. Now you can add to that Global Warming activitst to the world, Oscar winner and hopefully a NObel Prize winner.

Al Gore really needs to run for prezident. He could actually turn things around.

Al Gore's experience in the political system is pretty well-rounded, i'll give you that. For me, however, all that experience just tells me he's a company man. At the end of the day, Gore will bow to the corporations that stand to profit from his save the world endeavors.

His work with global warming is nice, as i said previously. But please bear in mind, he hasn't actually changed anything as of yet. Even if he does, there are a million nay-sayers out there who aren't even sure humans have anything to do with this global warming phenomenon.

I just don't see how Gore is going to turn things around. It's not like he can ignore Islamic Jihad against America, and it's not like muslim extremists care one bit about climate change. Saving the environment isn't going to make all the other problems go away, and i'm sorry to say i think his only real area of authority lies in the environment. Even if he has other areas of authority, all he is known for is the environment. That's a pretty flimsy platform if you ask me (and every other candidate who has ever run on it).

Originally posted by The Cyfre

Al Gore's experience in the political system is pretty well-rounded, i'll give you that. For me, however, all that experience just tells me he's a company man. At the end of the day, Gore will bow to the corporations that stand to profit from his save the world endeavors.

Company man?

Nothing could be farther from the truth, my friend. That's part of the beauty of the GORACLE's fate. In loss, he was burned and the dross fell off. He walked away from electoral politics for real; and became a very wealthy man in his own right. He is owned by no one but Tipper Gore and God above. He is idependent.

And he's got all that experience.

His work with global warming is nice, as i said previously. But please bear in mind, he hasn't actually changed anything as of yet.

I totally disagree. Five years ago, no one was listening to warnings on global warming. When I was in college (early '90s), it was laughed at. Al Gore, alone, by sheer force of his name and reputation around the world, has brought this mind-numbingly boring issue to the forefront of world debate. No one else, and no other group has had that kind of impact. That's why he won the Oscar, and I hope that is why he wins the Nobel Prize in October.

I just don't see how Gore is going to turn things around. It's not like he can ignore Islamic Jihad against America, and it's not like muslim extremists care one bit about climate change. Saving the environment isn't going to make all the other problems go away, and i'm sorry to say i think his only real area of authority lies in the environment. Even if he has other areas of authority, all he is known for is the environment. That's a pretty flimsy platform if you ask me (and every other candidate who has ever run on it).

Al Gore has the ideas, the know-how, the machinery and the rolodex to make things happen.

Al Gore was a prophet in 2002, opposing the invasion of Iraq for all the right reasons. He knows his foreign policy; and he knows war. He himself served as an enlisted soldier in Vietnam.

A great leader usually has more than a few areas of expertise.

He is an innovator's president, too. He did not "invent the internet" as people claim he said.:shk: But he did go farther than anyone in championing it for the public. He is a revolutionary thinker.

He has more vision, wisdom, experience, courage of convictions and a reservoir of good will abroad than any other candidate.

GORE/OBAMA '08!

[edit on 7/10/07 by EastCoastKid]

Sorry, lying about half-baked "science" to get publicity doesn't make you a better candidate. All you have to do is watch An Inconvenient Truth and you'll know what I'm talking about.

Originally posted by Johnmike
Sorry, lying about half-baked "science" to get publicity doesn't make you a better candidate. All you have to do is watch An Inconvenient Truth and you'll know what I'm talking about.

And what scientific sources to you base your thinking on?

Do you have any links?

Are they candidates for the Nobel Prize or past winners?

You're telling me that I can only believe things that other people say?
Kind of anti-intellectual if you ask me.

Originally posted by Johnmike
You're telling me that I can only believe things that other people say?
Kind of anti-intellectual if you ask me.

So that's your 'anti-argument?'

You just believe things you want to believe?

You have no sources to back up your beliefs?

:shk:

I base my beliefs on fact and logic. I could show sources showing facts that I used to reach conclusions, or try and find an article or something by someone who reached a similar conclusion that I did, I guess. But I guess not all people believe in independent thought.

Originally posted by Johnmike
I base my beliefs on fact and logic. I could show sources showing facts that I used to reach conclusions, or try and find an article or something by someone who reached a similar conclusion that I did, I guess. But I guess not all people believe in independent thought.

Its hard to evaluate when you refuse to share your sources. Until you provide some links to your "scientific data" we have every reason to doubt your word.

I like your style, EastCoastKid, and while I respect your ideas and think you make a hell of an argument for the worth of Al Gore, it hasn't changed this feeling in my gut that says more of the same from another man of the system.

His father was a politician, he has been a politician for many many years. I appreciate his passion for the environment, and while I do not necessarily believe our planet is in such peril based solely on the actions of humanity (did you hear, even Pluto is warming up?), I do believe it's a good idea to coserve energy, to recycle, to use less and utilize more. I like Gore's desire to see progress in technology, and we all have his political "gusto" to thank for the internet being where it is today. He didn't invent it, no, but he did pave the way so the internet could grow into the amazing animal it has become.

That being said, he is not known for being a war-time leader, and i'm afraid to say that's what the american public will be voting on.

I would like nothing more than to pull all troops out of all parts of the world and bring them home to defend our borders. I would love it if we could take that bloated military budget and start investing in our own country and the future, like education and space exploration. I just hope i'll see it in my lifetime. I know i won't see it in 2008.

Originally posted by The Cyfre
Honestly, I think the only way Ron Paul has a shot is if his supporters (likely democrats and independents)

You know people should let people know when they are going to interject their own opinion,particularly when their opinion goes against everything that is known.

Republicans have lost over 75% of its base, they call themselves independents now, in the last 3 years. The republicans fired all thier telemarketers because no one was giving any money. I will give you that he is appealing to Democrats and Independents though, but it does not take away from the fact Ron Paul is the only Conservative American Patriot on that stage, I dare you to put his words next to some of the greatest Conservatives, Republicans and Patriots and see who lines up with whom. I can tell you now Reagan, Lincoln, Madison, Washington, Jefferson, and hamilton would of LOVED Ron Paul. They spoke the same language.

Neo-Cons are Trotskyites, no one witha political degree disputes that fact, I just wish the sheeple, the 25% still calling themselves Republicans today, would wake up and realize that the Republican Party left them not them leaving the Party.

God Bless Ron Paul.

Originally posted by theindependentjournal

Originally posted by The Cyfre
Honestly, I think the only way Ron Paul has a shot is if his supporters (likely democrats and independents)

You know people should let people know when they are going to interject their own opinion,particularly when their opinion goes against everything that is known.

Republicans have lost over 75% of its base, they call themselves independents now, in the last 3 years. The republicans fired all thier telemarketers because no one was giving any money. I will give you that he is appealing to Democrats and Independents though, but it does not take away from the fact Ron Paul is the only Conservative American Patriot on that stage, I dare you to put his words next to some of the greatest Conservatives, Republicans and Patriots and see who lines up with whom. I can tell you now Reagan, Lincoln, Madison, Washington, Jefferson, and hamilton would of LOVED Ron Paul. They spoke the same language.

Um, yeah. I was hoping you'd see words like "i think" and "likely" imply that it is my own opinion. And how can you tell me my opinion goes against everything that is known, when you say in your second paragraph that the 75% of former Republicans now call themselves Independent? Doesn't that statement alone make my opinion an accurate one? If you're having trouble following my thought, i'll be happy to try and make myself more clear. Although I can't see how I could be any more clear.

I am well aware that Ron Paul is the only actually conservative candidate on stage, and i've made that point in several posts here on ATS as well as other places on the internet. Moreover, I started the entire thread on the basis that I am a supporter of Ron Paul, complete with a strategy on how I BELIEVE he can win the election.

The only election that will result in a valid leader who will bring this country out of the mire is an election where Republicans, Democrats and Independents will unite at the voting booth, choosing a candidate everyone can have faith in. That candidate, this year, is Ron Paul.

But it ain't gonna happen until he become the republican nominee or is the first third party candidate to win an election. Both of those are very tall orders. I don't know if you're telling me the current republican base is going to vote for him or not. If you are, then you live in a fantasy world where christianity hasn't hijacked the republican party. That party isn't about true conservative values anymore; it's about religious leaders being allies of powerful big business politicians and swaying religious herds to vote how they want them to vote.

Ron Paul's support of pulling our troops and bases around the world, I BELIEVE (this is my own opinion), leads many voters to think he might not be as religious as other politicians, and that's how the bulk of the republican party seems to vote these days. I was actually surprised to find that Paul does not support separation of church and state, that he thinks religion should play an integral role in the shaping of American society.

I fully support separation of church and state. Yet, I agree with Ron's opposition of it. Why? Because he is the only candidate I BELIEVE when religion comes up.

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Neo-Cons are Trotskyites, no one witha political degree disputes that fact, I just wish the sheeple, the 25% still calling themselves Republicans today, would wake up and realize that the Republican Party left them not them leaving the Party.

God Bless Ron Paul.

I just hope those republicans now calling themselves Independents were too lazy to change their party affiliation, because that means they still have a say in who becomes the republican candidate. I'll believe it when i see it.

I agree with everything you've written in your response, aside from the mis-assesment of the statement of mine that you quoted. I am not a registered voter in this state as of yet, but i can tell you with 100% certainty that i will register as a republican, and vote for Ron Paul. But he'll need all the help he can get, and i would absolutely love it if Democrats and Independents would switch their affiliation to republican in a concerted effort to make him the republican nominee for President in 2008.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

Originally posted by xpert11
EastCoastKid I could just see you starting a group called Republicans for Al Gore the only problem would be that you would be the only member.

And yet, there would be an army of Independents and Dems behind this cause.

There are a lot of disaffected Republicans out there who want change. They'd go for Gore. He's been around a few blocks.

it's funny how you downplay republican support for paul, he has plenty of support considering he's 3rd with cash on hand and has meet-up groups in the thousands basically working for him for free while other candidates pay people to get their message out. ron pauls message sells itself.

al gore to bring change? the same guy who debated ross perot about the now disaterous NAFTA? HAH. Al gore is a member of the counsel on foreign relations and is just another memeber of the corrupt establishment. The only thing he will bring that's different is heavier regulations, an even bigger government and more taxes.



[edit on 18-7-2007 by ape]

It seems obvious that SO many people have no idea what this word means, that I figured I'd post the definition where it's used (improperly at that).

Isolationism: –noun
the policy or doctrine of isolating one's country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, international agreements, etc., seeking to devote the entire efforts of one's country to its own advancement and remain at peace by avoiding foreign entanglements and responsibilities.


This is, by the way, a far cry from Dr. Paul's stand. I can't tell you how often I hear this garbage, but then again I can't tell you how often people get their superficial opinion from mainstream media, sans independent thought (general statement, not aimed at anyone here).

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Isolationism: –noun
the policy or doctrine of isolating one's country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, international agreements, etc., seeking to devote the entire efforts of one's country to its own advancement and remain at peace by avoiding foreign entanglements and responsibilities.

This is, by the way, a far cry from Dr. Paul's stand. I can't tell you how often I hear this garbage, but then again I can't tell you how often people get their superficial opinion from mainstream media, sans independent thought (general statement, not aimed at anyone here).

I understand your point, and I agree that Ron Paul is not an isolationist in the truest sense of the word. When compared to others, however, he is more isolationist than any of the candidates on the market today. He does believe in a free market economy and encourages progress in the market place with other nations across the globe. He does not believe in setting up army bases all over the world. He does believe in letting nations take care of their own problems.

And please, if anyone here was getting their Ron Paul information from the main stream media, youd have a lot more responses by people who think Ron Paul is a crack pot.

Originally posted by The Cyfre

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Isolationism: –noun
the policy or doctrine of isolating one's country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, international agreements, etc., seeking to devote the entire efforts of one's country to its own advancement and remain at peace by avoiding foreign entanglements and responsibilities.

This is, by the way, a far cry from Dr. Paul's stand. I can't tell you how often I hear this garbage, but then again I can't tell you how often people get their superficial opinion from mainstream media, sans independent thought (general statement, not aimed at anyone here).

I understand your point, and I agree that Ron Paul is not an isolationist in the truest sense of the word. When compared to others, however, he is more isolationist than any of the candidates on the market today. He does believe in a free market economy and encourages progress in the market place with other nations across the globe. He does not believe in setting up army bases all over the world. He does believe in letting nations take care of their own problems.

And please, if anyone here was getting their Ron Paul information from the main stream media, youd have a lot more responses by people who think Ron Paul is a crack pot.

I would say bushs foriegn policy is much more of an isolationist policy when compared to what ron paul is advocating. I would say the Bush doctrine has failed this country, and that's the policy the ' mainstream ' candidates are advocating.

Originally posted by The Cyfre

Um, yeah. I was hoping you'd see words like "i think" and "likely" imply that it is my own opinion. And how can you tell me my opinion goes against everything that is known, when you say in your second paragraph that the 75% of former Republicans now call themselves Independent? Doesn't that statement alone make my opinion an accurate one? If you're having trouble following my thought, i'll be happy to try and make myself more clear. Although I can't see how I could be any more clear.

I am well aware that Ron Paul is the only actually conservative candidate on stage

Chatting online recently reminded me that I am still a Republican. And I can exercise my choice in the Republican nominations. I am going to vote for Ron Paul. I know he probly won't win, but at least I will sleep well at night knowing I voted for the right man.

On the flipside, I hope Gore runs. And I hope he's cunning enuff to enlist Obama to run w/him. They would be unbeatable.