President Paul

Thanks PFT, the message is getting out there finally!!!!!!

I've just watched it 4 times.

I have forwarded the youtube link by email to all my friends. So far, none of the 3 people I have sent it to have responded. :(
 
not a fan.

for instance:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/17/1017278/-Letting-them-die

(excerpts below)

In the wake of the let him die episode of the last Republican debate, in which the audience took it upon themselves to go where even Ron Paul himself would not, advocating for the death of someone who was sick if they had no insurance that would pay for their treatment, the story of Ron Paul's 2008 campaign chairman has been getting increased attention. Deservedly so, for it is a similar case, and even by itself perhaps accounts for Paul's own moment of hesitation on the matter:

Back in 2008, Kent Snyder Paul's former campaign chairman died of complications from pneumonia. Like the man in Blitzer's example, the 49-year-old Snyder was relatively young and seemingly healthy* when the illness struck. He was also uninsured. When he died on June 26, 2008, two weeks after Paul withdrew his first bid for the presidency, his hospital costs amounted to $400,000. The bill was handed to Snyder's surviving mother, who was incapable of paying. Friends launched a website to solicit donations.

According to the Wall Street Journal's 2008 story on his death, Snyder was more than just a strategic ally: He was the only reason Paul thought he ever had a shot at the presidency in the first place.

Kent Snyder raised over $19 million for Ron Paul, but could not afford insurance for himself because of a preexisting condition. After his death, efforts by friends to assist with the medical bills (Ron Paul's suggested solution in response to the debate question, you may recall) raised about $35,000 in donations, less than 10 percent of what was needed.

...

That is what I find so cold in Ron Paul, and in the other freedom-lovers that share the stage with him, and especially in those members of America that they so feverishly wish to cater to. They can see that their solution does not work: The evidence is in every town, every day, but it still does not matter to them. They will poke their fingers out at you, and lecture on how churches or friends or neighbors will take care of it all; if you note that churches and friends and neighbors have never, ever been able to take care of it all, they will scoff, and mutter something about freedom; if you press them on what freedom means in such a context you will, eventually, come back around to the darkest response, which is let them die.

It is cold, and dark, and miserable, and mean, and tribal, and cruel.

It never ceases to amaze me, the emotions that we will wrap up in a flag and call patriotic if it suits us. A large swath of America is made up of very cruel people, people who value their own self-indulgence over the welfare of their neighbors, and they seem uniformly to be the most pompous in their exhortations of both patriotism and godliness. They are here to defend the nation from monsters who would parcel out a modicum of support to all citizens, and not just ones they personally know of or approve of: If they help their fellow man, they want to see the person grovel for it a bit, and helping an anonymous soul is deemed not just a pointless exercise but an insult to their very freedom.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
Thanks PFT, the message is getting out there finally!!!!!!

I've just watched it 4 times.

I have forwarded the youtube link by email to all my friends. So far, none of the 3 people I have sent it to have responded. :(
Click to expand...

that's cos they're all sheeple :lol:
 
hennypenny said:
not a fan.

for instance:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/17/1017278/-Letting-them-die

(excerpts below)

In the wake of the let him die episode of the last Republican debate, in which the audience took it upon themselves to go where even Ron Paul himself would not, advocating for the death of someone who was sick if they had no insurance that would pay for their treatment, the story of Ron Paul's 2008 campaign chairman has been getting increased attention. Deservedly so, for it is a similar case, and even by itself perhaps accounts for Paul's own moment of hesitation on the matter:

Back in 2008, Kent Snyder Paul's former campaign chairman died of complications from pneumonia. Like the man in Blitzer's example, the 49-year-old Snyder was relatively young and seemingly healthy* when the illness struck. He was also uninsured. When he died on June 26, 2008, two weeks after Paul withdrew his first bid for the presidency, his hospital costs amounted to $400,000. The bill was handed to Snyder's surviving mother, who was incapable of paying. Friends launched a website to solicit donations.

According to the Wall Street Journal's 2008 story on his death, Snyder was more than just a strategic ally: He was the only reason Paul thought he ever had a shot at the presidency in the first place.

Kent Snyder raised over $19 million for Ron Paul, but could not afford insurance for himself because of a preexisting condition. After his death, efforts by friends to assist with the medical bills (Ron Paul's suggested solution in response to the debate question, you may recall) raised about $35,000 in donations, less than 10 percent of what was needed.

...

That is what I find so cold in Ron Paul, and in the other freedom-lovers that share the stage with him, and especially in those members of America that they so feverishly wish to cater to. They can see that their solution does not work: The evidence is in every town, every day, but it still does not matter to them. They will poke their fingers out at you, and lecture on how churches or friends or neighbors will take care of it all; if you note that churches and friends and neighbors have never, ever been able to take care of it all, they will scoff, and mutter something about freedom; if you press them on what freedom means in such a context you will, eventually, come back around to the darkest response, which is let them die.

It is cold, and dark, and miserable, and mean, and tribal, and cruel.

It never ceases to amaze me, the emotions that we will wrap up in a flag and call patriotic if it suits us. A large swath of America is made up of very cruel people, people who value their own self-indulgence over the welfare of their neighbors, and they seem uniformly to be the most pompous in their exhortations of both patriotism and godliness. They are here to defend the nation from monsters who would parcel out a modicum of support to all citizens, and not just ones they personally know of or approve of: If they help their fellow man, they want to see the person grovel for it a bit, and helping an anonymous soul is deemed not just a pointless exercise but an insult to their very freedom.
Click to expand...

Nice ambush mate!

So tell me, do you think that government theft by the barrel of a gun is morally acceptable then?
 
hennypenny said:
It is cold, and dark, and miserable, and mean, and tribal, and cruel.
Click to expand...

it is definitely cold and dark. government is a mechanism, not your mom. it then becomes miserable and mean and cruel when people have been trained to expect this sort of support and it gets jerked out from under them, which is not what Dr. Paul is suggesting. He is talking about reform on a system which will take decades to dismantle as it has taken decades to construct.
 
GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul wins California straw poll 17th September
Texas Rep. Ron Paul won a California straw poll, the state Republican Party announced in a statement Saturday night.

A total of 833 ballots were cast during the straw poll, the statement said.

Paul won with 44.9% of the votes, Texas Gov. Rick Perry came in second with 29.3% of the votes, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney came in third with 8.8% of the votes.
Click to expand...

According to Wikepedia Ron Paul is now in the lead for all polls done this year even though his name was left off some polls. They are now saying that Ron Paul is winning the online polls unfairly because his fans love voting online - well where are the online fans for the other candidates?
It seems that Ron Pauls supporters are far more passionate than the fans of other candidates! :D
 
hennypenny said:
not a fan.

for instance:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/17/1017278/-Letting-them-die

Back in 2008, Kent Snyder Paul's former campaign chairman died of complications from pneumonia. Like the man in Blitzer's example, the 49-year-old Snyder was relatively young and seemingly healthy* when the illness struck. He was also uninsured. When he died on June 26, 2008, two weeks after Paul withdrew his first bid for the presidency, his hospital costs amounted to $400,000. The bill was handed to Snyder's surviving mother, who was incapable of paying. Friends launched a website to solicit donations.

Kent Snyder raised over $19 million for Ron Paul, but could not afford insurance for himself because of a preexisting condition. After his death, efforts by friends to assist with the medical bills (Ron Paul's suggested solution in response to the debate question, you may recall) raised about $35,000 in donations, less than 10 percent of what was needed.

...

That is what I find so cold in Ron Paul, and in the other freedom-lovers that share the stage with him, and especially in those members of America that they so feverishly wish to cater to. They can see that their solution does not work: The evidence is in every town, every day, but it still does not matter to them. They will poke their fingers out at you, and lecture on how churches or friends or neighbors will take care of it all; if you note that churches and friends and neighbors have never, ever been able to take care of it all, they will scoff, and mutter something about freedom; if you press them on what freedom means in such a context you will, eventually, come back around to the darkest response, which is let them die.

It is cold, and dark, and miserable, and mean, and tribal, and cruel.

It never ceases to amaze me, the emotions that we will wrap up in a flag and call patriotic if it suits us. A large swath of America is made up of very cruel people, people who value their own self-indulgence over the welfare of their neighbors, and they seem uniformly to be the most pompous in their exhortations of both patriotism and godliness. They are here to defend the nation from monsters who would parcel out a modicum of support to all citizens, and not just ones they personally know of or approve of: If they help their fellow man, they want to see the person grovel for it a bit, and helping an anonymous soul is deemed not just a pointless exercise but an insult to their very freedom.
Click to expand...

Sorry hennypenny, but you just don't quite get it. Dr Paul's argument is simple, his solution worked perfectly many decades ago. It doesn't work now because the govt got in the way. Kent Snyders bill was $400,000 something he could not afford and something many can not afford. You have to ask yourself how come medical costs became so high? the reason was because the govt got involved and put in medicare and medicaid, so they started the insurance nonsense which increased the cost of medicine substantially. Now the middle class is squeezed out of healthcare coz its not affordable. The govt's solution is to put more insurance cover and make it mandatory to bring down the cost. Well if it didnt work for medicare why would it work for obamacare. Simple, he wants to unwind the programs to bring the costs down and that will once again allow the churchs and friends etc to cover the costs for those that are helpless. Like you said they raised $35k for Kent but it wasn't enough...it wasnt enough because medicare and medicaid have raised the cost year after year. So Dr.Paul is the only candidate who gets to the root problem and has a solution. your just a regurgitation of the big media and big govt takeover of peoples liberties using the tagline of helping the poor.
 
Last night I watched Lateline and dismayed that they again talked only of Perry and Romney as candidates in the running. NO mention at all of Ron Paul even though he won the recent Californian straw poll by a large margin! :mad:
So I sent a letter of complaint to them telling them that their news reporting is no longer credible. Apparently they have to put letters of complaint before a committee to see if there has been any unbiased reporting.
I will wait and see if I get a response!

The only reason I can now see for this blatant ignoring of Ron Paul is because they have been told by certain powerful people never to mention his name - why so paranoid?
Can only be because they really fear him if nominated that he has the ability to topple Obama whereas Perry and Romney probably not capable of doing it?
Lots of reasons why the powerful elite would not want him has president - Ron Paul wants to end the wars and overseas occupations (end the war machine), Ron Paul wants to 'End The Fed' plus sticking to the Constitution means repealing unconstitutional legislation previously passed - The Patriot Act? But it would still have to pass Congress so why so much fear of him? Would he bring back a gold standard? It is so obvious the bias against him yet his long record of speaking out and sticking to his principles is there for everyone to see - lots of videos on Youtube of his speeches but very little of the other candidates.
He has a very strong and passionate following now which is going to be increasingly difficult to ignore!
 
heard someone comparing him with bobby kennedy the other day. I really fear for this man if he does start to swing the real momentum his way, I dread say it but theres too much at stake for the illuminati if he gets too far. Its going to take a peoples revolution to overthrow the 'elite' Ron Paul is the catalyst but it will take strong public will to succeed. vive le peaceful revolution
 
I hope so man, but I got a bad feeling about Perry.. Even if Dr Paul gets over him, he may have Ron killed..
JFk all over again.
 
thatguy said:
hiho said:
I have never taken any note of a US Election ........ til now, this could be globally significant
Click to expand...
Same, but I am no supporter. BUT I am watching him almost as closely as spot :)
Click to expand...

anybody who believes in freedom and the constitution will be a supporter.
 
geewiz said:
I'd love to see Ron Paul win. Win or lose however, America's gonna have a big economic and social crash. Big time.
Click to expand...

With Ron Paul at the helm - i dont believe it would be too late for America!

without him, they are doomed - and so are we ...
 
I apologize for the following comment if it offends anyone but Perry comes across to me as a dangerous pseudo religeous hypocritic (I just toned that down from my original rant! :) )and God help the USA if he gets elected!
Have you seen the video where he starts a speech by calling everyone to prayer? I believe that religeon should be kept firmly out of politics!
He has had no mercy for those convicted and sentenced to death who may have been innocent! I see a real mean streak in that guy under his false smile which he seems to use whenever he is actually peeved at someone asking him awkward questions. He is scarey! Watch some of his interviews.
I also believe that he wouldn't stop at anything to get rid of Ron Paul.
 
Look at what Rick Perry has done in Texas since hes become governor.. increased the size of government immensely, higher taxes, tripled the debt and the list goes on yet the mainstream focuses on the fact hes "created" a million jobs (170,000 government jobs included) without looking at anything else and not talking about the good jobs that were destroyed to make way for the cheap stimulus jobs that will disappear when the debt financed stimulus evaporates

In the last debate Ron Paul gets boo'ed for saying that America invited the 9/11 attacks because they bombed the sh*t out of Iraq and had military based all over the middle east and were killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in those countries..

If someone walked up to you and punched you in the face and stole your shoes would you be pissed off and want to retaliate? Bloody oath you would, if they were bigger and stronger than you so you couldnt win in a fight you would plan to burn their car or house down or whatever revenge you think is suitable.

How is that Tea party audience so damn stupid? Do they lack the common sense to understand that people will be angry when their countries are bombed?

The lack of any common sense is astounding
 
Wout said:
Look at what Rick Perry has done in Texas since hes become governor.. increased the size of government immensely, higher taxes, tripled the debt and the list goes on yet the mainstream focuses on the fact hes "created" a million jobs (170,000 government jobs included) without looking at anything else and not talking about the good jobs that were destroyed to make way for the cheap stimulus jobs that will disappear when the debt financed stimulus evaporates

In the last debate Ron Paul gets boo'ed for saying that America invited the 9/11 attacks because they bombed the sh*t out of Iraq and had military based all over the middle east and were killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in those countries..

If someone walked up to you and punched you in the face and stole your shoes would you be pissed off and want to retaliate? Bloody oath you would, if they were bigger and stronger than you so you couldnt win in a fight you would plan to burn their car or house down or whatever revenge you think is suitable.

How is that Tea party audience so damn stupid? Do they lack the common sense to understand that people will be angry when their countries are bombed?

The lack of any common sense is astounding
Click to expand...

I dont think its just Tea Party people who dont get that... but yeh - most of them get their 'facts' exclusively of FOX... so it's understandable that they don't see it differently.

However, being Tea Party supporters at least they seem to get it that big government is the greatest enemy of Americans - and in that regard they are light years ahead of the rest of the population!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top