Ron Paul is not a Good Politician!!

Originally posted by David9176

Name a "good" politician.

Bernie Sanders....don't ask me for more.

And by "good"...I mean one who always fights for the middle class and poor. I can't think of anyone who is better. Wish he was Senator of my state.

edit on 31-5-2011 by David9176 because: (no reason given)

Agreed 100000% with Sanders and not naming anymore!

Although I think there are a couple more...Maybe.

Regardless, it's a sad state of affairs.

So true - Ron Paul is too honest to become president.

Over the years I have often been approached and told "You should run for President, Congress, whatever -- I will vote for you in a minute! True I told them, BUT other than "the few" that THINK, & REASON , Use honesty and "Do What Is Right", rather than what makes you and your's rich and powerful - WHO ELSE WILL VOTE FOR ME?

My guess is that about 15-20 % of people understand and care BUT 15% is not enough to VOTE ANYTHING IN.
That is why I do not run!

What I try to do though is EMPOWER PEOPLE -- that means emotionally self able, financially self able, spiritually self able and economically self able (take care of self and others by knowing how to "do" and not slave of "the boss", company, government you work for ---so you can be free and NOT OWNED by anyone or anything.

THEN I show them how to bring others to the state of "independence and independent thinking", and totally able to tell the man "go to he.." if he says otherwise.

I then show how to influence others and sometimes this means "taking control" of others if the end (their own self empowerment is to be caused by them "being forced to learn, do and think on their own.

Actually it is very simple to TAKE OVER THE WORLD (but this time by us few who CARE about others and the world we live -- NOT "me", now"!

reply to post by David9176

Add the fact that he wants to legalize all drugs, including crack and heroin...and throw in prostitution for good measure. All things that majority of people will not support.

Prostitution is legal in Australia and since that happened you actually see less girls on the streets..
They are health checked and the brothels are monitored..

All up much safer for the working girls and the clients..

Making it illegal does not stop it so why not regulate instead??

It's what sets Ron Paul apart from the others! If he uses deceit to get into office he's just like any other politician. What I think has to happen, is people need to start listening to what he says instead of listening to other politicians mocking him. Eventually he will hit a cord with voters who are not giving him a fair look. I think the key is spreading his ideology on the internet and to keep pounding on the other candidates lame and deceitful claims. He needs to attack these candidates constantly instead of waiting for them to attack him. Go Ron!

Originally posted by abilitiy
U sir have no idea what your talking about. Ron Paul is the "Only" good politician out there!

You didn't read. If you did, you need to read again.

Thanks for posting Ron Paul. A politician ?, thank you know who, he isn't. We don't need anymore politicians like the ones we have mostly in congress now. We need someone who speaks the truth and understands the constitution. I do feel bad for him if he would get elected though. Don't believe there is any way for us ever to pay back over 14 trillion in debt, even with a good president and congress. Defaulting on the debt is going to happen sooner or later.

Even if he was a good politician he could never win the presidency. So why does it matter what he does or does not say or do?

I decided to look up the definition of 'politician' and the results were very interesting!

Politician - 1. A person who is professionally involved in politics. 2. A person who acts in a manipulative and devious way, typically to gain advancement.

So by this definition, I would have to agree that he is not a good politician. He is a man of principle, great character and integrity. But devious and manipulative he is not.

However, I disagree on one point:

I think he could very easily become president. He has the support and the numbers. He has the knowledge to win the debates without great effort. He has the experience he needs.

Unfortunately, I don't think his term would last very long since he is a direct and outspoken challenger to TPTB. Who knows...

But who am I to talk.. I'm clearly bias.

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
I think I see where you're coming from, Ron Paul is NOT a good politician - he is not adept at the game of politics. That makes him a better congressman and hopefully a better presidential candidate. I hope he keeps his honesty and integrity intact and doesn't try to play dirty politics just to keep up with the Republican and Democratic parties.

2nd. i will vote for him BECAUSE he is honest and has integrity. i think it is sad to suggest that those that are good should be just as evil as the rest in order to further their agenda. why should Dr. Paul lie in order to fit in? shouldn't we be demanding all the other liers and demegogues start telling the truth?

seems the OP has their priorities backwards.

reply to post by backinblack


Most of what Ron Paul states is completely ideological based and that puts him in the extreme on many stances making him unelectable.

He will have a hard time getting the elderly to vote for him...a major voting block for the reasons I posted earlier.

Ron Paul also has the racist Ron Paul letters to deal with. They brought it up in 2008 and it will be brought up again in during the primaries.

Originally posted by gorgi
Ron Paul is completely clueless. He has no idea how to run the government properly. His idea of returning to the gold standard is a disaster. His ideas to cut most government agencies is horrible and will put more Americans at risk. His idea of a flat tax will hurt he lower classes and help the rich while bringing in very little tax revenue.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Ron Paul is the only one with a clue. You are repeating anti-Paul talking points and they are simply not true. He also does not advocate a gold standard but rather competing currencies. Also he does not advocate a flat tax. The alternative to Ron Paul's solutions is to continue to complete collapse!

Ron Pauls Platform Excerpts:

Budget:

While the president can do a great deal on his own, to really restore the Constitution and cut back on the vast unconstitutional programs that have sunk roots in Washington over 60 years, he will have to work with Congress. The first step in enacting a pro-freedom legislative agenda is the submission of a budget that outlines the priorities of the administration. While it has no legal effect, the budget serves as a guideline for the congressional appropriations process. A constitutionalist president’s budget should do the following:

1. Reduce overall federal spending

2. Prioritize cuts in oversize expenditures, especially the military

3. Prioritize cuts in corporate welfare

4. Use 50 percent of the savings from cuts in overseas spending to shore up entitlement programs for those who are dependent on them and the other 50 percent to pay down the debt

5. Provide for reduction in federal bureaucracy and lay out a plan to return responsibility for education to the states

6. Begin transitioning entitlement programs from a system where all Americans are forced to participate into one where taxpayers can opt out of the programs and make their own provisions for retirement and medical care

Cuts:

As I mentioned in the introduction to this article, it would be wrong simply to cut these programs and throw those who are dependent on them “into the streets.” After all, the current recipients of these programs have come to rely on them, and many are in a situation where they cannot provide for themselves without government assistance.

Monetary policy:

There are additional steps a pro-freedom president should pursue in his first term to restore sound monetary policy. He should ask Congress to pass two pieces of legislation I have introduced in the 110th Congress. The first is the Audit the Fed bill, which would allow the American people to learn just how the Federal Reserve has been conducting monetary policy. The other is the Free Competition in Currency Act, which repeals legal tender laws and all taxes on gold and silver. This would introduce competition in currency and put a check on the Federal Reserve by ensuring that people have alternatives to government-produced fiat money.

Transition from entitlments:

Therefore, a transition away from the existing entitlement scheme is needed. This is why a constitutionalist president should propose devoting half of the savings from the cuts in wars and other foreign spending, corporate welfare, and unnecessary and unconstitutional bureaucracies to shoring up Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and providing enough money to finance government’s obligations to those who are already stuck in the system and cannot make alternative provisions. This re-routing of spending would allow payroll taxes to be slashed. The eventual goal would be to move to a completely voluntary system where people only pay payroll taxes into Social Security and Medicare if they choose to participate in those programs. Americans who do not want to participate would be free not to do so, but they would forgo any claim to Social Security or Medicare benefits after retirement.

Some people raise concerns that talk of transitions is an excuse for indefinitely putting off the end of the welfare state. I understand those concerns, which is why a transition plan must lay out a clear timetable for paying down the debt, eliminating unconstitutional bureaucracies, and setting a firm date for when young people can at last opt out of the entitlement programs.

For the entire article on his positions read here: www.yaliberty.org...

I see a lot of misinformation on Ron Paul's positions, it would do everyone well to read this article and get the facts instead of repeating anti-Paul BS.

reply to post by hawkiye


You are wrong and do seem to understand what your idol actually says.
Paul says that he wants a gold standard and a flat tax. These are bad ideas. He also wants to gut medicare and social security. Killing the Fed is a nice slogan but thats another idea of his that shows how little economic training he has had.
Having the doc as a president is worse than any president we have had so far.

And slashing spending hard economics times is a sure way to make it worse. But hey, the Md knows a lot about economics.

Ron Paul will deliver a great message whether he wins or loses. Having Ron Paul as president would almost put people to sleep, assuming that 3-4 years of political activism can wipe away hundreds of years of tyranny. In a way, the people should not be let off that easy, it would be a crime. And if Ron Paul loses, there's always Rand Paul, but I think the real issue is, Ron Paul will lose, but will fire up enough people to take over the cities and states. Especially if the voting is rigged, which it most certainly will be, so Ron Paul will still be the democratic choice, and the elite will look even more evil and ridiculous behind the scenes pulling the levers, while the whole world watches them pull the levers.

Originally posted by gorgi
reply to post by hawkiye

 

You are wrong and do seem to understand what your idol actually says.
Paul says that he wants a gold standard and a flat tax. These are bad ideas. He also wants to gut medicare and social security. Killing the Fed is a nice slogan but thats another idea of his that shows how little economic training he has had.
Having the doc as a president is worse than any president we have had so far.

And slashing spending hard economics times is a sure way to make it worse. But hey, the Md knows a lot about economics.

You are right I DO understand what Ron Paul says . And in case you missed it I posted quotes of WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAYS. Which is why you don't have any evidence for your statements...

reply to post by gorgi


No, I think that's RuPaul.

reply to post by gorgi


you say that having a gold standard and a flat tax are bad ideas but you don't express WHY having a gold standard or flat tax are bad ideas.

Back when we had the gold standard the dollar was backed on something solid and unchanging. If more dollars were printed the value would go down and vica-versa. It was stable

If you look at what the dollar today is backed on you will find it's backed on oil, debt, and nothing. Banksters have the ability to give out loans based on other people's promise to pay back their loans. I could loan $200 to a person and because they promised to pay it back I can then loan it out again since the first person is "good for it". They also have the ability to print and lend money out of thin air. A banker can type into his computer $XXX.XX and then use that artificially created money to give to a person.

Maybe there is something better than the gold standard, I don't know. What I DO know is that the American money system we have now, controlled by the Federal Reserve (which is privately owned), is completely outta whack and, if anything, the gold standard will bring back financial stability in the LONG RUN. The clever tricks being used now to keep things afloat can't last forever.

Oh sure ending the Fed is gonna cause a #load of difficulties in the short run since many americans will have drastically alter their typical spending lifestyles but it will be the first of many steps to living more sensiblyand responsibly

If you had read any of his books you would know he is in fact very knowledgeable about the money system and economics.
www.ronpaul.com...

I'd recommend reading the free pdf about Austrian economics.

Originally posted by CtheTruthSeeker
reply to post by gorgi

 

you say that having a gold standard and a flat tax are bad ideas but you don't express WHY having a gold standard or flat tax are bad ideas.

Back when we had the gold standard the dollar was backed on something solid and unchanging. If more dollars were printed the value would go down and vica-versa. It was stable

If you look at what the dollar today is backed on you will find it's backed on oil, debt, and nothing. Banksters have the ability to give out loans based on other people's promise to pay back their loans. I could loan $200 to a person and because they promised to pay it back I can then loan it out again since the first person is "good for it". They also have the ability to print and lend money out of thin air. A banker can type into his computer $XXX.XX and then use that artificially created money to give to a person.

Maybe there is something better than the gold standard, I don't know. What I DO know is that the American money system we have now, controlled by the Federal Reserve (which is privately owned), is completely outta whack and, if anything, the gold standard will bring back financial stability in the LONG RUN. The clever tricks being used now to keep things afloat can't last forever.

Oh sure ending the Fed is gonna cause a #load of difficulties in the short run since many americans will have drastically alter their typical spending lifestyles but it will be the first of many steps to living more sensiblyand responsibly

If you had read any of his books you would know he is in fact very knowledgeable about the money system and economics.
www.ronpaul.com...

I'd recommend reading the free pdf about Austrian economics.

The gold standard is bad for many reasons.
Expanding the money supply is based on the acquisition of gold. By mining I suppose. Expanding the money supply is the current way to ease bad economic times.
There is not enough gold to back the dollar. It gives short term price volatility. We already have long term financial stability.
Those out way the one or so good parts of it.

The Fed is not a privately owned bank.