Is Ron Paul the Gerald Ford of our Generation?

Gerald Ford was a member of the House of Representatives for a number of years and ultimately became the most recent individual to ascend to the White House as Vice President and then President of the United States without ever having been elected to those offices as a result of a vote by the people.

After the resignation of Sprio Agnew, Ford was nominated and confirmed as Vice President and after Nixon's resignation 8 months later Ford became President.

Those 8 months, in my own humble opinion, reveal that the United States government was overthrown.

en.wikipedia.org...

Ron Paul, also a member of the House of Representatives, while it seems that he is fighting for the chance to stand for a vote according to how most Americans understand the process, he has found what has been called 'Archaic' rules in order to achieve the Republican nomination and stand as the primary opponent against an incumbent President.

While he is performing miserably according to the laymen's understanding of America's political system...many have informed the world that he is actually performing spectacularly and is in fact the front runner and may be President less than 6 months from now.

en.wikipedia.org...

From what I have been learned to understand this system, Ron Paul should not be considered a serious candidate for President, being that he is not being selected by the people according to the the election process.

But, I am being informed by people on this site that I do not know anything about how this system works. I find that difficult to accept.

My question then, stated more specifically:

Is Ron Paul the candidate of people actively attempting to subvert the American political process? and an additional question is...should supporters of Ron Paul's pseudo-candidacy be treated as subversive elements within the American system and possibly be treated as enemies of the state?

Yeah, Ron Paul is fighting an uphill battle against the mainstream press and powers that want to keep him quiet. With Paul we have our liberty to regain and those forces that want to keep us down and under their thumbs are getting their knees scraped.

Paul will be our next President. Love it or shove it!

No, another carter
wrapped in the american flagged.

A hidden communist that would let iran have
a bomb and kill millions of jews...

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


not if he doesn't do more to appeal to the people that matter...magic tricks ain't gonna cut it this time.

but, I suppose many are willing to test my theory concerning the above statement.

No.

Ron Paul is the Ross Perot of this generation

Don't like that one?

Ron Paul is the Ralph Nader of this generation.

reply to post by neo96


so what you are saying is that Ron Paul is a man that will run for President and lose....

...for this generation?

Originally posted by popsmayhem
No, another carter
draped in the american flagged.

A hidden communist that would let iran have
a bomb and kill millions of jews...

Seriously?

It's these ignorant remarks that need to be weeded out as soon as they appear. Just so you know, Israel's and America's intelligence agencies all report Iran has no nuke, isn't working on a nuke, and Iran isn't planning on building a nuke. Oh, and are you calling Ron Paul a communist? What is it with people and communism these days? I swear you people belong back in the McCarthy era.

Oh, I see, just noticed I was responding to pops.... figures.

Speaking of Carter, wasn't he the prez who was into UFOs and released many a document under his administration about UFOs and whatnot? If so, I'm into that.

Originally posted by michaelbrux

Those 8 months, in my own humble opinion, reveal that the United States government was overthrown.

I'm curious as to why you say that. How can Ford's presidency be considered an overthrow? The Constitution was followed. The House of Representatives confirmed Ford as Vice President. As the House contains elected representatives of the people, the people were indirectly consulted. As I remember it the Congress was very reluctant to proceed against Nixon after Spiro Agnew resigned until the vacant vice presidency was filled.

Now I suppose you could say it was a coup because the Republicans in the House would hear of no one else save Ford as Vice President, but in the end an elected body, Congress,approved overwhelmingly of Ford as Vice President. The vote was 97-3 in the Senate and 387-35 in the House. The result when it all played out after Nixon's resignation was replacing a Republican President with a Republican President. The power in the House and Senate did not change. If the Republicans had gone ahead with impeachment and Nixon had resigned without a Vice Presdient, the presidency would have gone to Carl Albert as Speaker of the House, who was a Democrat. By doing it like they did, they insured the Presidence would remain Republican.

So first, I don;t understand the overthrow part and second, I don't understand how the Ron Paul situation is similar.

reply to post by michaelbrux


So, because he is winning by the actual rules instead of the made up rules people assume exist he is a subversive and enemy of the state? That makes absolutely no freaking sense. Ron Paul votes in accordance with the constitution consistently. I don't agree with everything he says, but I recognize he is probably the only friend of freedom in the election.

Think of him more as the McGovern of our generation.

Ron Paul is the Ron Paul of our generation, just as Ron Paul was the Ron Paul of his generation.

reply to post by schuyler


Sun Tzu said...

...its better to capture an enemy system in tact.

just because it wasn't messy or ugly, doesn't mean it wasn't overthrown.

based on what i'm seeing, America was overthrown in 1973/74.

doesn't mean Americans didn't take it back at some point subsequent...just that a coup d'etat occurred.

but, when things occur according to ususual, archaic as some have described it, rules, i wonder...is something sinister being plotted in dark corners.

because you have claimed to me that nothing at all sinister is occurring, I will go ahead and accept that.

thank you.

reply to post by MikeNice81


That's all I asked...and you let me know what is up.

No one is likened unto Ron Paul; at least not since the men that actually wrote the Constitution were still alive.

The caucus process is just as legitimate an electoral process as is a Presidential preference poll.

Nobody's subverting anything, they're just using the rules as they were laid out. Romney's camp could be doing just as well in the caucuses if they had the same level of support.

Originally posted by michaelbrux


based on what i'm seeing, America was overthrown in 1973/74.

As I recall it the overthrow was in November of 1963.

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by schuyler

 

Sun Tzu said...

...its better to capture an enemy system in tact.

just because it wasn't messy or ugly, doesn't mean it wasn't overthrown.

based on what i'm seeing, America was overthrown in 1973/74.

OK. I am really not intentionally trying to be obtuse here, but

who was overthrown and who overthrew it? Who captured it?

Ford kept most of Nixon's cabinet, including Kissinger. The makeup of the house and senate, including its leadership, remained the same. The makeup of the Supreme Court remained the same.

Originally posted by popsmayhem
No, another carter
wrapped in the american flagged.

A hidden communist that would let iran have
a bomb and kill millions of jews...

edit on 10-5-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)

I agree Ron Paul philosophy is incredibly dangerous to our country. As I pointed out in another thread that I authored:

I find it really shocking that the most suspicious people on the internet do not raise the very question I am raising in regards to Ron Paul. They do it to everything else from Iran, to the littlest regulations that nobody has ever heard of before. That's what I love about ATS, what I don't like about ATS is the devotion to Ron Paul on here and how for some reason nobody questions the man!

reply to post by michaelbrux


I would more go with overthrown in 1963 by the international banking cartel with Johnson as Chief of Puppets after the JFK assassination. Everything changed when JFK was killed. Gerald Ford was just another selected puppet in a long line of puppets.

Cheers - Dave

reply to post by schuyler


that they kept the same government with very little changes is testament to the skill of the plotters and the degree to how deeply the system had been penetrated. another poster said he thought the overthrow occurred in 1963...perhaps that was just initial infiltration...1973/74 was a near complete overthrow and the resistance didn't begin until 79/80 and a balance in 86.

who did it?

off the top of my head...

...the Soviet Union and Shah of Iran.

then of course support players and traitors.

knocking off the United States isn't like sticking up a liquor store fellas. it would be something that'd require the commitment of generations.

reply to post by popsmayhem


you just called Ron Paul a 'hidden communist'?

You just made a very exclusive list of mine...

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by schuyler

 

that they kept the same government with very little changes is testament to the skill of the plotters and the degree to how deeply the system had been penetrated. another poster said he thought the overthrow occurred in 1963...perhaps that was just initial infiltration...1973/74 was a near complete overthrow and the resistance didn't begin until 79/80 and a balance in 86.

Ah, so the overthrow was so successful that the changes were imperceptible and the players almost 100% the same. And the likely perpetrators were the Soviet Union, which no longer exists, and the Shah of Iran, whose government and structure no longer exists.

hat's one helluva successful overthrow, I must admit!