Ron Paul looks like a GENIUS now

Fed likes to operate in the shadows. The only difference between Ron Paul and other members of congress is that the other's can't even balance a check-book. Ron Paul is no dummy, besides being very knowlegable on Fed matters, he's also a phsyician who prefers to wave fees rather than accept medicaid(according to wikipedia)

Re: besides being very knowlegable on Fed matters

Are you serious? The guy is a crackpot who wants to abolish the nation's central bank. Could he be any more out of step with the 99.999% of economists who actually know something?

99.99% of economists publish through the Federal Reserve or hope to work there someday.
Actually there are many economists who don't agree with the dual mandate which itself is relatively new in this country.

"The guy is a crackpot who wants to abolish the nation's central bank. Could he be any more out of step with the 99.999% of economists who actually know something?"

Right.

Because wanting to abolish the nation's "central bank" -- which has been at the heart of the nation's economic ills since the day of its inception -- certainly would make one a "crackpot."

And please don't profess to speak for 99.999% of economists, unless you have something real to back that up.

West34, I suggest you do your own research, rather than listen to the corporate controlled Keynesian economists who, unlike Paul, saw the collapse coming in the 90's.

The Federal Reserve and the big banks fought for more than two years to keep details of the largest bailout in U.S. history a secret. Now, the rest of the world can see what it was missing.

The Fed didn’t tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn’t mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed’s below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.

Saved by the bailout, bankers lobbied against government regulations, a job made easier by the Fed, which never disclosed the details of the rescue to lawmakers even as Congress doled out more money and debated new rules aimed at preventing the next collapse

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html

Also the Federal Reserve regional banks are private owned by JP Morgan etc, they influence over-all Fed policy. The most powerful regional is the NY Fed which is no more federal than federal express and not even subject to the freedom of information act. Ron Paul knows this. They actually pay dividends out at 6% to their owners.

I agree Matt. Claiming to know what 99.99% of Economists think is a bogus statement.

Re: Claiming to know what 99.99% of Economists think is a bogus statement.

Ya think? It's called hyperbole to make a point. Some people need to cut and paste a bit less and use common sense a bit more.

And I'm not sure I would trust Ron Paul's opinion about putting on a band-aid.

I think Ron Paul is mostly crazy. But while he would LIKE to abolish the Fed, what he actually proposes to Congress is no where near extreme. What he wants, and has so far gotten some of, is more TRANSPARENCY from the Fed. I think 99.99% of economists would not oppose THAT. This is the only way in which I think RP was a genius.

If you actually READ the article, you will find it AMAZING. Not one democrat or republican quoted knew about ANY of this.

I mean...WOW.

"Are you serious? The guy is a crackpot who wants to abolish the nation's central bank. Could he be any more out of step with the 99.999% of economists who actually know something?"

99.99% of economists were too stupid to get into finance or accounting courses, so they majored in economics.

99.99% don't know what the hell is going on or they'd be the masters of the universe, buyin up 15 cpw units for their maids/male hookers, instead they subsidize rent in pelham.

paste and cut

What RP wants:

http://www.amazon.com/End-Fed-Ron-Paul/dp/0446549193

Wow -- It just dawned on me what RP really wants -- he wants to sell books!

Ron Paul will never ever become President. The main reason is that he makes to much sense and people are afraid of of him because he throws hard cold reality in their faces. Those who work for banks and the government must consider Ron Paul the enemy hence this is why people like West34 probably dislikes him.
If Ron Paul ever did get elected West34 would scream like a fat pig.

Re: Mises: "corporate controlled Keynesian economists"

Now that's the funniest thing I've read all day. Ha. yes, I'm screaming.

Ron Paul will not be the chosen Republican candidate because Medias don't support him.

"the corporate controlled Keynesian economists"

Yes, Paul Krugman, Nouriel Rouobini, Joseph Stiglitz, and Robert Reich: tools of the moneyed elite.

Fed likes to operate in the shadows. The only difference between Ron Paul and other members of congress is that the other's can't even balance a check-book. Ron Paul is no dummy, besides being very knowlegable on Fed matters, he's also a phsyician who prefers to wave fees rather than accept medicaid(according to wikipedia).......

So I ask you Riversider, Would you rather have Ron Paul as the Republican nominee or Newt?

Brooks,
If Fed and Monetary policy is the only issue then Ron Paul, but of course that's not the case, so then Newt and Romney in that order. The other candidates other than Huntsman are a joke. The sad thing is that Huntsman and Paul are not being vetted properly by the media who focus on candidates that generate the best ratings over what's good for the country. Huntsman and Paul are extremely intelligent, thoughtful candidates(certainly more so than Bachmann & Cain.

There! I said a mouthful.

Cain is toast. A fourth woman came forth today, this time one he knows, admits having given money too, who claims they had a 13 year affair. Cain's lawyer said "consenting adults" in his non-denial.

the media, wall street, and the Fed are controlled by the same kin of people, that's why ron paul is always silenced by them

ignored no more..
----------------------------
Ron Paul closes on Newt Gingrich: In time to win Iowa?

Ron Paul is one percentage point behind Newt Gingrich, says one poll. Could Ron Paul be surging in time to win Iowa?

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2011/1214/Ron-Paul-closes-on-Newt-Gingrich-In-time-to-win-Iowa

Iowa is a meaningless state. Huckabee won Iowa. How did that work out for him?

Go RP!!!

go rp mean go republican?

nah, useless, all republican candidates are either human trash or brainless, except mit romney and ron paul, but these two are hated by most in rp.

get with it What is the subject of the thread? Ron Paul!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VMUZIVYuluc#!

>nah, useless, all republican candidates are either human trash or brainless,

Is that good or bad from someone whose name is 'caonima'?

A whole lot of crazy racist shit from Paul from ages 45-57 or so.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/company-ron-paul-keeps_613474.html

Why is Mr. Paul so popular?

As I pointed out in September, Americans overwhelmingly want:

• The Federal Reserve to be reined in if not abolished
• The never-ending, open-ended, goalpost-moving wars to stop and the troops to be brought home
• Our liberties to be restored, and the martial law indefinite detention idiocy to be reversed

Paul has consistently championed these three American wishes for three decades. None of the other Republican (or Democratic) candidates are on the right side of history on any of these issues.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/12/ron-paul-is-now-the-republican-frontrunner/

"Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, the Ron Paul Political Report, the Ron Paul Survival Report, and the Ron Paul Investment Letter. What I found was unpleasant.

“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks,” read a typical article from the June 1992 “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism,” a supplement to the Ron Paul Political Report. Racial apocalypse was the most persistent theme of the newsletters; a 1990 issue warned of “The Coming Race War,” and an article the following year about disturbances in the Adams Morgan neighborhood of Washington, D.C., was entitled “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” "

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/company-ron-paul-keeps_613474.html

"No foreign country was mentioned in the newsletters more often than Israel. A 1987 newsletter termed it “an aggressive, national socialist state,” and another missive, on the subject of the 1993 World Trade Center attack, concluded, “Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.” In 1990, the newsletter cast aspersions on the “tens of thousands of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing to wok [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/company-ron-paul-keeps_613474.html

pretty bad if true jason.
-------------------------
Mr. Paul did not respond to an interview request, but repudiated the writings in 2008. Likening himself to a major news publisher, he said he did not vet every article that was featured in his newsletters. “I absolutely, honestly do not know who wrote those things,” Mr. Paul said in an interview on CNN at the time, adding that he did not monitor the publications closely because he was busy with a medical practice and “speeches around the country.”

Mr. Paul, who is a physician, had said his political persuasion as a libertarian precluded him from harboring such biased views because “I don’t see people in collective groups.”

On Monday, his deputy campaign manager, Dimitri Kesari, reiterated that Mr. Paul “did not write, edit or authorize” the language.

“He totally disavows what was said and disagrees with it totally,” Mr. Kesari said. “The only responsibility he takes is for not paying closer attention.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/20/us/politics/bias-in-ron-pauls-newsletters-draws-new-attention.html?_r=1&hp

So he only hires racists and doesn't supervise them adequately, he's not racist himself?

Not actually, Jordyn. He never said WHO authored the reports. They almost all had no by-line, but were ALL called "Ron Paul" newsletters, and he made (as the article states) as much a million dolalrs per year from them. And they ran for decades - the ones from which the article quote are from when he was aged 45 to 57.

If someone puts something out with your name on it, and pays you for it, and you admit to writing much of it yourself, and "can't remember" who wrote the crazy racist homophobic, anti-Semitic, and so forth shit, there is a problem.'

And as the article points out, in 1995 he was defending the ACTUAL CONTENT of the articles, no matter who wrote them. Then in 2000 he "can't remember" who wrote them.

He only repudiates them in 2008.

And in 2011, he repeated his view that he would NOT have voted for the Civil Rights act of 1964 (or similar such acts) and if they came up for votes today, would STILL not vote for them, and has no problem with states, cities, or local businesses discriminating based on race or religion.

scary that a guy like paul, with this kind of shit on him, can get anywhere near the mainstream--amazing this isnt front and center where paul is referred to in the media

Awkward, Riversider. Here is Ron Paul on C-Span in 1995(!!!) touting the contents of his newsletter. So its a complete fabrication when he claims that by 1992 he had no idea what was in them.

"For a man who now says that he didn%u2019t pay any attention to the newsletters published under his own name for years, he certainly seems to be pretty conversant with its contents in 1995. Remember that the newsletters didn%u2019t become a political liability for Paul until 1996, in the middle of his election campaign against Lefty Morris, who first raised the issue. This interview is also not far removed from the appearance of the racist passages and kooky conspiracy theories in the newsletters, such as this in 1992..."

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/22/paul-in-1995-say-have-you-read-my-newsletters/

"...aul, writing in his independent political newsletter in 1992, reported about unspecified surveys of blacks.”Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action,”Paul wrote.

Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered “as decent people.” Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote:

“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal,” Paul said.

Paul also wrote that although “we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.” …

He added, “We don’t think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That’s true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such.”..."

USA Today’s Jackie Kucinich also reports today that Paul’s story has changed over the years:

"...Paul told TheDallas Morning News in 1996 that the contents of his newsletters were accurate but needed to be taken in context. Wednesday, he told CNN he didn't write the newsletters and didn't know what was in them...

...In 1996, Paul told TheDallas Morning News that his comment about black men in Washington came while writing about a 1992 study by the National Center on Incarceration and Alternatives, a criminal justice think tank in Virginia...

Now, Paul says he had nothing to do with the contents of the newsletters published in his name..."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-12-21/ron-paul-racist-newsletters/52147878/1

He speaks the truth.

Here is a letter (not the newsletter, a letter) Paul wrote in 1993 signed by him in which he touts absolutely crazy shit.

"...Paul's letter went on to describe various plots and schemes that he had "unmasked," including a "plot for world government, world money and world central banking." He also claimed to have exposed a plan by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to "suspend the Constitution" in a falsely declared national emergency.

Despite being "told not to talk," Paul wrote that his newsletters also "laid bare" the "Israeli lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica," and a "federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS."

Paul claimed that his "training as a physician" helped him "see through" this alleged cover-up.

Paul also suggested that a planned U.S. currency with new notes designed to curb counterfeiting and money laundering would result in the distribution of "totalitarian bills" that "were tinted pink and blue and brown, and blighted with holograms, diffraction gratings, metal and plastic threads and chemical alarms."

Paul said the money was designed to allow authorities to "keep track of American cash and American citizens."..."

http://news.yahoo.com/ad-newsletter-ron-paul-forecast-race-war-011503908.html

"...“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks,” read a typical article from the June 1992 “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism,” a supplement to the Ron Paul Political Report...

...Paul alleged that Martin Luther King Jr., “the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours,” had also “seduced underage girls and boys.” The man who would later proclaim King a “hero” attacked Ronald Reagan for signing legislation creating the federal holiday in his name, complaining, “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.”..."

Truth? Really?

Truth?

"...South Africa’s transition to multiracial democracy was portrayed as a “destruction of civilization” that was “the most tragic [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara”; and, in March 1994, a month before Nelson Mandela was elected president, one item warned of an impending “South African Holocaust.”...

...about President George H.W. Bush’s decision to sign a hate crimes bill and invite “the heads of homosexual lobbying groups to the White House for the ceremony,” adding, “I miss the closet.” “Homosexuals,” it said, “not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.” ...

...In 1978, a newsletter blamed David Rockefeller, the Trilateral Commission, and “fascist-oriented, international banking and business interests” for the Panama Canal Treaty, which it called “one of the saddest events in the history of the United States.” A 1988 newsletter cited a doctor who believed that AIDS was created in a World Health Organization laboratory in Fort Detrick, Maryland...."

From http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/angry-white-man?page=0,3

The end of Apartheid was “the most tragic [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara”. Including the centuries-long slave trade. And various famines.

Truth?

"...What’s more, Paul’s connections to extremism go beyond the newsletters. He has given extensive interviews to the magazine of the John Birch Society, and has frequently been a guest of Alex Jones, a radio host and perhaps the most famous conspiracy theorist in America. Jones--whose recent documentary, Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement, details the plans of George Pataki, David Rockefeller, and Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, among others, to exterminate most of humanity and develop themselves into “superhuman” computer hybrids able to “travel throughout the cosmos”--estimates that Paul has appeared on his radio program about 40 times over the past twelve years...."

Truth?

Again True-- Paul's letter went on to describe various plots and schemes that he had "unmasked," including a "plot for world government, world money and world central banking.

In the past these meetings were kept secret.

The original conference was held at the Hotel de Bilderberg, near Arnhem in the Netherlands, from 29 May to 31 May 1954. It was initiated by several people, including Polish politician Józef Retinger, concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe, who proposed an international conference at which leaders from European countries and the United States would be brought together with the aim of promoting Atlanticism – better understanding between the cultures of the United States and Western Europe to foster cooperation on political, economic, and defense issues.[2]

http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/index.php

In 2001, Denis Healey, a Bilderberg group founder and, for 30 years, a steering committee member, said: "To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing."[43]

But addressed the concern or accusation of one WORLD POWER.

David Rockefeller and Bill Clinton at Bilderberger meeting in 1991.

http://www.rense.com/general17/quote.htm

"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries."

-- David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton and by Dan Quayle

please, brooksie, your boy is a non-starter--you'll never nearly get the awful stink off him, and youre ruining your credibility by trying--

nit-picking Bilderberger is a waste of time, and makes you look foolish

get a new hero

always fun to through it out there

jason10006
about 3 weeks ago
ignore this person
report abuse

Cain is toast.

Another racist comment from Jason.

The end of Apartheid was “the most tragic [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara”. Including the centuries-long slave trade. And various famines.

Truth?

Notice how Brooks completely ignored all the crazy racist and homophobic shit. What a nutjob he is (Brooks I mean.)

"...South Africa’s transition to multiracial democracy was portrayed as a “destruction of civilization” that was “the most tragic [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara”; and, in March 1994, a month before Nelson Mandela was elected president, one item warned of an impending “South African Holocaust.”...

>The end of Apartheid was “the most tragic [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara”. Including the centuries-long slave trade. And various famines.

Your quotation has the position you are attributing outside of the quotation marks.

Plus you didn't explain your racist commend about Herman Cain. Would you ever refer to a white candidate as "toast"?

I mean...read this 1993 letter from Ron Paul and signed by him for yourself. I mean...seriously.

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/11/12/Solicitation2.pdf

only nut job on this board is you Jason

So guys, what should I read today: Mein Kampf or Ron Paul's newsletters?

Socialist, read Mein Kampf in its original German, it will put hair on your chest.

Latest Iowa poles:

Ron Paul 22%
Mitt Romney 21%
Newt Gingrich 14%

polls

from the web:

Iowa Republican caucuses have a poor record in choosing their party's nominees. In the five presidential nominating cycles with active Iowa Republican caucus competition, the Hawkeye State has voted for the eventual Republican nominee only twice—in 1996 for Bob Dole, in 2000 for George W. Bush—and only once was the Iowa winner elected president.

Brooks2
about 1 hour ago
ignore this person
report abuse Latest Iowa poles:

Ron Paul 22%
Mitt Romney 21%
Newt Gingrich 14%

inconsequential

"In the January 2008 caucuses, Mike Huckabee finished first with 34% of the vote."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_Republican_caucuses,_2008

I don't think so.. Newt is losing steam.. which is good for the country because he is a bad man

newt has no chance at the presidency. ron paul get's weirder and scarier the closer people look at him. romney is running, and he is winning. i really just don't know 100% who his vp will be. my initial instinct was bachmann, and i think i stand by that for now.

Main problem with Bachmann is that people confuse her with Christine O'Donnell, the non-witch. But otherwise she's pretty sexy.

If you're talking sexy.. them Mccain made the right choice

Yes, and Cindy is rather attractive too.

cindy is pretty but callista gingrich is a fembot with friggin laser beams in her corneas.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=callista+gingrich&um=1&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=587&tbm=isch&tbnid=FA_Y-W3DTKHslM:&imgrefurl=http://kaystreet.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/reality-is-stranger-than-fiction-this-is-weird/&docid=JtgkMLHmixg5FM&imgurl=http://kaystreet.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/newt-gingrich-and-callista-gingrich.jpg&w=800&h=631&ei=FI_6TqvcI6Lq0gHIpfiwAg&zoom=1

avert your eyes!

come in Lucille- HB knows I was not talking about Cindy---

You were talking about Sarah, and I remarked that the other woman in his life is attractive.

yes..

my bad

actually, come to think of it, who WAS the last really super blonde first lady? hillary was blondish and barbara bush was a silver fox, pat nixon was a redhead. since the invention of color photographs no bright blondes have ever been first ladies! is this noted somewhere? off to google.

oh shit!

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=ann+romney&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1280&bih=587&tbm=isch&tbnid=2mI3hTjm9-Aj4M:&imgrefurl=http://www.fitsnews.com/2011/09/30/ann-romney-stays-at-hotel-trikki/&docid=IyO-CmIrO9jF2M&imgurl=http://fitsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/ann-romney.jpg&w=640&h=427&ei=Loz7TsmHGerg0QGB2ICjAg&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=140&sig=105468240948888814246&page=2&tbnh=109&tbnw=154&start=24&ndsp=22&ved=1t:429,r:12,s:24&tx=75&ty=76

this really messes with my prediction.

it's alright, everyone. she's more of a warm honey blonde. not cool platinum blonde like callista and cindy. phew!

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=ann+romney&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1280&bih=587&tbm=isch&tbnid=SdHhzb21n3uL0M:&imgrefurl=http://knowledgering.com/answers/politics-answers/whos-younger-of-ann-romney-and-callista-gingrich&docid=HcmD5DsPKgqOKM&imgurl=http://knowledgering.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2012-first-lady-hopefuls-Ann-Romney-and-Callista-Gingrich.jpg&w=439&h=304&ei=Loz7TsmHGerg0QGB2ICjAg&zoom=1

wow cindy was really beautiful before the plastic surgeons and hair people got to her. ok this wraps up my contribution for the day. god bless!

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=cindy+mccain&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1280&bih=587&tbm=isch&tbnid=0XiJdwXgpy77wM:&imgrefurl=http://aishamusic.wordpress.com/category/cindy-mccain/&docid=K1tu_d4WehngqM&imgurl=http://www.judiciaryreport.com/images/mccains-wedding-photo.jpg&w=379&h=480&ei=a437Tr70LIX30gG58cXFAg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=477&vpy=147&dur=3698&hovh=253&hovw=199&tx=89&ty=176&sig=105468240948888814246&page=1&tbnh=120&tbnw=95&start=0&ndsp=28&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=lucille+bluth&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&biw=960&bih=503&tbm=isch&tbnid=ui8epnwb_non6M:&imgrefurl=http://www.fanpop.com/spots/arrested-development/images/2842772/title/sarah-palin-lucille-bluth&docid=6u99GtzaTtME_M&imgurl=http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/2800000/Sarah-Palin-Lucille-Bluth-arrested-development-2842772-500-500.jpg&w=500&h=500&ei=t6T7TtWrOuf40gGe5tjDAg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=280&vpy=164&dur=1575&hovh=225&hovw=225&tx=132&ty=108&sig=112210156344603758716&page=3&tbnh=135&tbnw=132&start=21&ndsp=9&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:21

something in the eye again..

yeah, i can totally see the "similarities"

http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/3600000/Lucille-Animated-gif-arrested-development-3695240-275-155.gif

"Paul Campaign Touts Endorsement Of Preacher Who Advocates Death Penalty For Gays"

thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/12/29/395688/paul-campaign-touts-endorsement-of-preacher-who-advocates-death-penalty-for-gays/

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4443788&page=1

Obama's Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11

i get it... does JAson?

the recent attacks trying to demonize ron paul as a racist may instead help ron paul in redneck states such as iowa, because most of the rednecks there are racist

huh?

the demographic of paul supporters that perplexes the most is the military. he loves the demonize the military industrial complex; he believes in "non intervention", whatever the hell that means in practice; he would close bases and "bring home" the soldiers, which sounds wonderful and everything, but why isn't anyone asking Congressman Paul how he would have all those newly UNEMPLOYED soldiers support their families? he enjoys unrivaled support among the military and i don't understand that.

people forget that "the military industrial complex" is hugely profitable both private citizens who employed in some capacity as a result of that and America, the country, which acts as military backup to a lot of other sovereign nations who repay us with all kinds of perks and access. perks and access we would lose the second we stop being their muscle.

Clinton downsized the Military... they got jobs

lucil, being imperialism can earn money, it's true, but this truth cannot be told in public

ron paul's idea is to stop robbing others, work hard ourselves to earn money, which is also doable

clinton downsized the military. paul would completely change how it functions and what it does.

the Military needs to be downsized

please explain why you feel that way

Recently we put troups in Australia as a bulwark against China's military might. I'm not sure why we couldn't just lean on Australia to use their own riches and lives to protect their shores and a significant portion of the region.

"lucil, being imperialism can earn money, it's true, but this truth cannot be told in public"

it was only imperialism when other countries did it. those countries were bad. when America does it it's sound economic foreign policy.

Why do you feel we should be fighting others battles.

I've been there do that.. no need. let them fight their own

"I'm not sure why we couldn't just lean on Australia to use their own riches and lives to protect their shores and a significant portion of the region."

if you don't understand the wisdom of that move i don't even WANT to be friends with you anymore. and no, im not voting for obama. even though i basically like him. ive just been running my mouth about romney all over the place and now i have no choice, i have to vote for him. he'll still win, of course.

Thank you for capitalizing the word 'WANT.'