Sheeple and Ron Paul

When I first signed up with ATS, I had originally thought that the majority of people saw the world the same way I do, especially when it comes to government and TPTB. To be honest, I have been nothing but disappointed with people's "political" affiliations because there seems to be a vast majority who seems to think a few things that I personally can understand why my opinion is not the norm, but as far as all these Ron Paul threads popping up, I just can't hold my tongue anymore.

Ron Paul is not a hero, he is not going to save this country, and he is not being conspired against for the U.S. Presidency. To think otherwise is completely absurd. The fact of the matter is this; he is a politician. Even worse, he's campaigning for presidency. Does anyone remember who Barack Obama was before 2008? He was the so called miracle man all for change and fulfilling people's rights but when he got into office, where did all his promises go? He didn't accomplish anything he said he would because he just wanted the sheeples trust. Ron Paul is no different.

You see being elected president ideally is a difficult thing to do. Through the current popular vote/electoral college system that they pretend determines the next president, the idea is that you have to gain people's trust. How do you do this? Fulfill a need. Apply yourself to a demographic. Listen to people. Where does that go when you win the presidency? Out the window that's where.

If you fully believe that Ron Paul or any other presidential candidate will ever be able to properly serve this country, then I am afraid you are wrong because as long as presidency belongs to a human being, greed, personal gain, and puppetry are top priority, not people's views, opinions, or ideas.

Ron Paul is just like every other presidential candidate that's ever existed. He is a fraudulent face plate for a behind the scenes puppeteer with an agenda aimed toward personal gain. Stop pretending that Ron Paul is the greatest thing that could happen to this country because anyone with a brain in their head is smart enough to realize that the greatest thing that could happen to this country besides the abolishment of all corporate greed is simply a constitutional reform in which the people's opinions ACTUALLY matter, not the appearance that they matter.

In summary, Ron Paul sucks. Just like Obama. Just like bush. Get over it. No matter who you "vote" for, we all lose.

reply to post by davewr25


See, this is the greatness of having your OWN opinion.
You don't have to bash everyone for having a little hope in this country.
To just give up on it, is unpatriotic and pathetic at best.
Even if Ron isn't the hero for the United states.
I would pick him before Obama or anyone else.

Ron would eat you for breakfast.

sounds like you should get over... fact of the matter is ron pauls better than any other candidate up there...
from all the polls so far.. and the "oh we wont show roll pauls results cause he cant win" lol just mad cause hes doing good.. unless you like the money being spended on bs stuff and more recession...

While I don't readily trust anybody in politics; Ron Paul is not Obama nor is he George Bush. Look at his voting record look at his stances. The man doesn't lie and supports shrinking the he'll out of the federal government: rigged or not, that's a good enough reason to support him for me.

The fact that you refer to people as sheeple is telling enough.

You really don't know much about Ron Paul do you? He has always stood by his word he has never let propaganda sway his decisions. His votes are always for what is best for the country and the American people. Besides how many people had the nades to say how the the country was headed towards fascism when Bush was in office? And to say he isn't being ignored by the media just shows you don't watch the news.



Also how many other people have the guts to stand up in front of the rest of the government and give a speech like this one?

In fact, YOU are the one who is wrong. The fact that no one else shares your opinion should tell you something. The reason you are wrong in the case of Ron Paul is that he has a track record as a Congressman. You probably haven't taken the time to watch or read transcripts of his speeches going back to the 1980's, and instead just posted a pointless thread with your "opinions" that are not even remotely close to reality.


He is not your average politician, in that he does not flip-flop on his views and ideas. I can think of one time when he did, and that was excusable under the circumstances. You show me any other presidential candidate with that kind of track record, and I will...never-mind, because you won't. If you would have taken the time to do some research for yourself, maybe you wouldn't have been bashed for creating this POINTLESS thread.

reply to post by davewr25


davewr25 i'm awarding you +25 Internets for telling it like it is. this OP is so overdue it hurts. doubly so on a site where many seem to be awake and aware. i could babble on as to why but the point is moot.

i still hope the citizens of the usa one day unite and rise together for real true change in and of leadership. being stuck under the R & D party members fighting like children we will continue to suck it extra hard regardless of what arseclown we the people don't get to put in the office of president.

reply to post by LargeFries

He didn't "tell it like it is".
He stated an opinion, a very uneducated opinion.

reply to post by buster2010


So I guess this is why he was for Don't Ask Don't Tell then voted to repeal it once the political winds shifted. Very nice flip-flop.

the admins should go ahead and censor "sheeple" then itll just appear as # and surprisingly no information will be lost in context to the discussion.

reply to post by davewr25


davewr25 i enjoyed your OP so much i want to share with you a post i saw on another website i like to visit. this post is on fark.com, posted by member Rhino_man:

Why does Ron Paul hate the Constitution?

In 2009, he authored a bill that would have allowed the states to establish government churches and to persecute and discriminate based upon religion or sexual preference. It also would have stripped the Judiciary branch of its power to rule on the Constitutionality of state laws, something which is enumerated in the Constitution.

this is the source:

www.govtrack.us...

this is the heart of the matter:

SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON JURISDICTION.

The Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court--

(1) shall not adjudicate--
...
(A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion;

(B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or

(C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and

(2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1).

--------------

just wanted to share that tit-bit

reply to post by kro32


He changed his opinion after speaking with some outed soldiers but that was a nice try. Wasn't that fact posted in one of your recent attack threads too?

reply to post by eNumbra


C'mon it was a flip-flop. There's nothing any soldiers told him that he didn't know before. And if that is true than when he was first against it he certainly didn't research the issue at all. Not a good sign either way you look at it i'm afraid.

reply to post by davewr25


davewr25, here is a follow-up letter to my previous post. i thought you would get a good laugh from it as well, as pathetic as the truth is:

Rhino_man: Why does Ron Paul hate the Constitution?

In 2009, he authored a bill that would have allowed the states to establish government churches and to persecute and discriminate based upon religion or sexual preference. It also would have stripped the Judiciary branch of its power to rule on the Constitutionality of state laws, something which is enumerated in the Constitution.

Holy Fark! I thought you were talking out your ass for a moment and then went and actually read the bill..
We the People Act - Prohibits the Supreme Court and each federal court from adjudicating any claim or relying on judicial decisions involving: (1) state or local laws, regulations, or policies concerning the free exercise or establishment of religion; (2) the right of privacy, including issues of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or (3) the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation where based upon equal protection of the laws. Allows the Supreme Court and the federal courts to determine the constitutionality of federal statutes, administrative rules, or procedures in considering cases arising under the Constitution. Prohibits the Supreme Court and the federal courts from issuing any ruling that appropriates or expends money, imposes taxes, or otherwise interferes with the legislative functions or administrative discretion of the states. Authorizes any party or intervener in matters before any federal court, including the Supreme Court, to challenge the jurisdiction of the court under this Act. Provides that the violation of this Act by any justice or judge is an impeachable offense and a material breach of good behavior subject to removal. Negates as binding precedent on the state courts any federal court decision that relates to an issue removed from federal jurisdiction by this Act.

That's scary. It completely breaks the separation of powers and would basically enable states to trample on protected rights as they see fit.

WTF happened Ron Paul? You used to be cool.

This Ron Paul propaganda on ATS is truly downright scary. It just shows how incredibly fascist the USA populace has become.

reply to post by kro32


A better, more in line with liberty and the constitution opinion is a flip flop: would you prefer a leader who never changes his mind?

Flip-flop has become such a politically dirty word that really, it should only apply to outright lies who (example) promises no new taxes and makes new taxes. Changing ones opinion can be politically expedient but your political f word is nothing but a mainstream smear tactic.

Good news though, you've found some friends in this thread.

reply to post by davewr25

What, exactly, are your views that are so in contrast to Pauls?

reply to post by LargeFries


Am I missing something here?

I don't see anything about government churches or not allowing ANY federal remedy! If you actually read the bill it pretty much says that the Federal Gov't has no business getting involved in the affairs of the individual and the State.

BUT, the supreme court can be involved at any time if there is an issue of constitutionality. So it is fully with the parameters of the constitution.

Your "opinion" is based on another forum and presented as evidence? Ok, please read the bill and formulate your own opinion. Copy and pasting garbage from another forum is lame and intellectually dishonest

Edit to add:
What this does is gives the states the right to deal with local issues without the Federal government stepping on their toes. There is still a system of appeals in place to take it to the supreme court if needed.

reply to post by eNumbra


Well I certainly hope he doesn't change his mind about his other issues once he get's elected and has more discussions with people since he certainly has done that in the past.