Ron Paul's Revolution

Greetings, ATS. This is my first thread, and I wasn't quite sure where to place it, so may the Mods relocate it as necessary.



I've been doing some pondering lately on the subject of Ron Paul's running for potential POTUS. I, like many, am intrigued by his message of liberty and constitutionalism, but sometimes I find myself in doubt. For the sake of discussion, let's say there is definitely an elite group behind the curtains of current political events. Would they really allow a man with a sincere agenda such as RP's to come as far as he has? It seems evident to me that a rebellion of sorts is being prepped for by the government. Maybe he's part of a bigger plan. Bear with me here. Let's review what he's preaching...

1) End the Fed and Return to Gold Standard - I am all for the demise of the Federal Reserve. The fiat monetary system has had it's time and proven it's instability, however I'm not so sure about the latter. I mean, the gold standard's ideal in comparison to our current system, but then again, who really owns the largest quantities of gold bullion in the US as of late? I've heard rumors that Ft. Knox isn't holding what it used to, if much of anything. The most gold I know of is in the FR itself, though the majority isn't even owned by the FR, let alone Americans. Those that do hold any significant amount of gold are more than likely the same financially elite in the system we have. Seems like it might just be a ploy to play on dissent with the Fed while not really changing much of anything.

2) End the Wars Overseas! and Bring Our Troops Home - Once again, all for the former. The war on terror is a crackpot perpetual war that causes ridiculous unnecessary suffering and financial burdens upon all citizens. Part of this aspiration is to also focus on having more troops here in the homeland and not so many abroad at our worldwide network of military installations. Sounds cool... except... what if he really doesn't/can't end the BS surrounding this whole "homegrown terrorism" fear, economically things practically stay status-quo, and dissent only grows? Having the military concentrated here on the mainland would definitely stand to hinder an uprising. I mean, focus would be shifted away from wars in the Middle East, but would it in turn be shifting to one that's... well, civil? It's purely speculation, of course, but sometimes I wonder...

3) End the War on Drugs - Well... I'm on the fence with this one. Our incarceration rate for nonviolent drug crimes is rather preposterous, especially from the ethnic standpoint. Conspiracy-wise, I'm not seeing much possibility, but it kinda seems like big potential for a bad situation in general. Marijuana's one thing, but when it comes down to narcotics like crack-coc aine and methamphetamine, we're talking about releasing folks who have produced the stuff and have ample knowledge of the how-to when it comes to the manufacturing. Whether usage would increase if availability happens to is speculation at best, but I've seen said drugs destroy the lives and even souls of some good people.




There's more to his plan, I know, and most of it sounds pretty good. I still choose to stand behind Dr. Paul, but in the NWO light, there's just some uncertainty beneath the surface of it all...

Thoughts?

Start preppin

S & F friend Great post.

I agree with the points made wholeheartedly. It still burns me up that Congress never officially declared war, yet we're over in the Middle-East doing what, having a Tea Party? I don't hardly think so.

We should never have been there in the first place! Who's making the decisions anymore if not Congress?

i love the doc, and everything he stands for.

even though the establishment wont pick him, i am behind him all the way.
after all, its about the message. hopefully his son Rand will continue his dad's legacy.

he will forever be remembered as a great man america let slip through its fingers.

reply to post by jlm912


Good critique and you outline the same issues I have pause about.

Clearly the Gold Standard is a non-starter if that is what he means.

Not really an issue now as there is no way for him to win anyway at this point. I actually quite like him but can't come to grips with some of his ideas.

I would never admit you are unsure of your thoughts.
You are traveling through the internet unarmed.
From my experience never let the bots know you have no direction.

Originally posted by jlm912

3) End the War on Drugs - Well... I'm on the fence with this one. Our incarceration rate for nonviolent drug crimes is rather preposterous, especially from the ethnic standpoint. Conspiracy-wise, I'm not seeing much possibility, but it kinda seems like big potential for a bad situation in general. Marijuana's one thing, but when it comes down to narcotics like crack-coc aine and methamphetamine, we're talking about releasing folks who have produced the stuff and have ample knowledge of the how-to when it comes to the manufacturing. Whether usage would increase if availability happens to is speculation at best, but I've seen said drugs destroy the lives and even souls of some good people.

Well I can shed some light and hopefully help this one.

Dr. Paul is all about ending the FEDERAL War on Drugs.

This means that the Federal Government would not be in control of funding this, nor making laws in respect to it. Essentially it would leave it up to the state to decide whether meth, crack, heroin, etc is legal.

Now, how many states will honestly legalize heroin, crack, coke or meth? Probably none. This would mean that each state would have their own task force for enforcing the restriction of these drugs.

Marijuana would likely be legalized in ~50% of the U.S. I don't necessarily agree that this needs to or should happen, but I think if done correctly it could be a benefit to states that are hurting for revenue (by imposing a light tax on marijuana each state could theoretically generate quite a bit of income).

Hopefully I cleared that third point up.

Go Dr. Paul!

reply to post by jazzguy


I'm with you for the most part. Out of the options at hand, Ron Paul's a no-brainer... but there again, a no-brainer...

Debate equals
I do not know where I stand.
As you debate,
the ones that know will overrun!
You have already lost unknowing one!

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


My core thoughts are well stable and exactly where they need to be. I whole-heartily appreciate the concern, though.

Originally posted by jlm912
reply to post by Gmoneycricket

 

My core thoughts are well stable and exactly where they need to be. I whole-heartily appreciate the concern, though.

With core thoughts
you back up a theory of you maybe of AI
Taking a survey?
I question your human thought if any?

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


Seeing how many off topic posts in a row you can get away with? Darn now I'm doing it.

Don't worry,
I will give you time to kick back,
and re charge your battery.

The man's got some kind of hope in mind evidently. When it comes to the race he's still in it, even if not to win it. With the whole delegate thing, well if there's any solidity behind it... let's just say folks love an underdog, right? Time will ultimately tell as it always does.

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


All intelligence is artificial by definition

reply to post by Holodomor


Imagine the amount of jobs that would be instantly created by a legalized marijuana section of the economy. Hemp would become an industrial product again. I find it silly that we can't grow hemp in our own country but instead must import it from another. They make everything out of hemp now, and the potential revenue that could be generated on a state level would definitely benefit the people. But, alas, we have morality police that wish to make this plant illegal.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by Gmoneycricket

 

Seeing how many off topic posts in a row you can get away with? Darn now I'm doing it.

Of Topic I am not sure,
Bots with agenda seem to be the new human lore.
On what some call the internet.
I am cursed
I get get to touch a keyboard,
but not a human anymore!

I do not understand this
Ron Paul Bot.
I sent him money in 2008,
now he asks for more money,
before its to late.
I want to believe in
Ron Paul,
but all I find is,
should I vote for Ron Paul?
So when I vote for a bot called Ron Paul,
will I scream voter fraud.
Because I voted on the Internet?

reply to post by ExPostFacto


I once heard DuPont played a rather large role in marijuana's prohibition due to hemp being competition. Hell, they're still against it today:

"Why We Shouldn't Legalize Marijuana" (By a DuPont shill)

Can you tell,
I do not trust the internet,
asking how I will vote in the fall?