benhaskins
Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2007
- Messages
- 263
dont forget to start converting your family and friends
Convince me why Ron Paul (I am considering him)
- Thread starter HarbingerOfTruth
- Start date
southerntrendkill
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
- Messages
- 60
Welcome to the Revolution!
Now, donate to the campain, get off this forum, make some signs, join your local meetup, do a sign wave, canvas your precinct, be a precinct leader, ect... LOL!
Again Welcome to the Revolution!
Now, donate to the campain, get off this forum, make some signs, join your local meetup, do a sign wave, canvas your precinct, be a precinct leader, ect... LOL!
Again Welcome to the Revolution!
BreakYourChains
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 727
Great chart. Thanks. We can all just keep learning as well.
BreakYourChains
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 727
Welcome to Ron Paul! Please forgive those of us on this forum who might be rude or call a new person a troll. Some people have a hard time with freedom, and applying the principles..lol. Also, some people are really not supporters of Ron Paul who come to this forum, and might try to cause trouble. So, please be tolerant and forgive those who act like do do's sometimes.
Warrior_of_Freedom
Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2008
- Messages
- 8,454
First off, please don't let the die-hard Paul fans discourage you. They are young people that are sick and tired of how the government is operating, they have a lot of emotions and energy.
I started supporting Ron Paul since the first day I found out about him. I never see his face twitch a weird way when i'm watching him speak, unlike a lot of other candidates.
To me, Ron Paul cares more about the bigger issues at hand, everyone can argue about him with pro-life or pro-choice but in the end it will not effect our country economically, which is the main issue. Just today the stock markets took another stumble, the Feds cut interest rates to make it not so bad.
Ron Paul has served on many councils and committees for monetary issues and the such, and he has a deep understanding of how they work, what causes the problems, and what can fix them.
On a side note, he has to be doing something right if the mainstream media owned by rich corrupt men and women are trying to ignore him.
I started supporting Ron Paul since the first day I found out about him. I never see his face twitch a weird way when i'm watching him speak, unlike a lot of other candidates.
To me, Ron Paul cares more about the bigger issues at hand, everyone can argue about him with pro-life or pro-choice but in the end it will not effect our country economically, which is the main issue. Just today the stock markets took another stumble, the Feds cut interest rates to make it not so bad.
Ron Paul has served on many councils and committees for monetary issues and the such, and he has a deep understanding of how they work, what causes the problems, and what can fix them.
On a side note, he has to be doing something right if the mainstream media owned by rich corrupt men and women are trying to ignore him.
HOLLYWOOD
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 22,314
GET RID of the ENTITLEMENTS~!
The entitlements have multiple counterproductive effects to the US economy...
LIKE: DEBT, BIG GOVERNMENT, INFLATION, POLARIZATION, FAVORS ELITES, ETC...
NO MORE 100's of BILLIONS in SUBSIDIES!
NO MORE MASSIVE MEDICAL/MEDICARE/MEDICADE SUBSIDIES!
NO MORE INSURANCE COMPANIES! JUST MIDDLE MEN AND PARASITES!
NO MORE LOBBYISTS
NO MORE CORPORATE DONATIONS
The entitlements have multiple counterproductive effects to the US economy...
LIKE: DEBT, BIG GOVERNMENT, INFLATION, POLARIZATION, FAVORS ELITES, ETC...
NO MORE 100's of BILLIONS in SUBSIDIES!
NO MORE MASSIVE MEDICAL/MEDICARE/MEDICADE SUBSIDIES!
NO MORE INSURANCE COMPANIES! JUST MIDDLE MEN AND PARASITES!
NO MORE LOBBYISTS
NO MORE CORPORATE DONATIONS
PaleoForPaul
Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 560
Hi! I'm a long time Republican, so I understand where you're coming from. Let me see if I can answer some of your questions.
At some point, the Iraqi people will have to defend themselves, against themselves. I understand your sympathy for the Iraqi people, but what about America? How much money can we spend to try to keep two groups of people, who've hated each other for hundreds of years, from killing one another? How many American soldiers should we lose to try to get these people to get along? To give them the liberty the do not desire and will not fight for?
We talk about giving the Iraqi's freedom, but isn't true freedom self-determination? What I mean by that is, if they want a theocracy, shouldn't we let them have it?
I'm going to basically repeat myself here, but how much American money, and how many American lives should we sacrifice to try to save the Sunni from the Shia?
Iraq and Afghanistan are two very different countries. I could point to various things that show progress is pretty bad in Afghanistan, but think about this...The Afghanistan government was going to kill a christian for trying to convert people there. Is that the kind of government America should be spending money to keep afloat?
China/Taiwan is a tough call. On one hand, we want to promote democracy, but on the other hand, we have to go back to my original question. Is it worth it? For me, the first question that should be asked about any policy is does this benefit America? America should always come first.
Really, I don't think China will attack Taiwan at this point. That would endanger good relations with the US, and their economy is predicated on us buying their cheap goods.
Lets look at it from the other point of view. If the cost of defending Taiwan is the loss of California to a nuclear strike, is it worth it?
Yes, he wants to eliminate the federal income tax. This would send government revenue back to the levels of the mid-90's. Government would still function, they'd just have to be fiscally responsible and cut some programs.
Paul doesn't want to switch to the gold standard, he wants to create a second currency, basically a gold backed dollar, and you could choose which one you wanted. Both would be legal tender, and the market would decide. Personally, I'd like some of the gold backed dollars, as they would be a good hedge against inflation.
It depends, the fair tax has it's supporters and its detractors. Ron Paul doesn't want the Fair tax. He wants to get rid of federal income tax period.
Sending them back wouldn't ruin our economy. Don't believe the propaganda that there are jobs Americans won't do. Americans are better than that, and our politicians who pimp that line are slandering us as a people.
Ron Paul's plan on immigration is simple, deny illegals all benefits. No free schooling, No free healthcare, no welfare, and fine businesses who hire them. If they can't get work, and they can't get free stuff, they will go home willingly.
I don't know where you are from, but three hospitals in my state have closed recently, due to the influx of people (mostly illegals) who use hospitals as their primary care physicians.
Heroin would actually be the worst.
Notice however, that even though we have the strict drug laws, they're still ruining lives. If we made things legal, do you think it would change anything all that much?
The other problem is how much power you give to the government. While maybe you and I find heroin being banned a good thing. Of course, then our tax money is spent to jail marijuana users as well. At one point they even banned drinking! That is the real problem, whenever you involve the government in anything, it always expands to take away as much freedom as it can get away with. It's not just the freedom of the user either, it's our tax money they take, thus taking away our ability to spend the money as we see fit.
While Ron Paul's positions are unique to him, he isn't unlike some other conservatives that have run. Take for example, Pat Buchanan's presidential runs in 1992, 1996 and 2000. While they don't agree on everything (Pat is a wee bit protectionist, and isn't as anti-intervention as Ron Paul) they agree on a lot.
To put it simply, the conservative party is divided. In one camp is the neoconservatives, who believe in an aggressive foreign policy, free trade at all costs, and a bit of liberalism on social issues and spending. On the other side is the paleoconservatives and paleolibertarians who believe in cutting government (departments!), an America First foreign policy, and traditional stances on social issues.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservative_-_Paleoconservative_Conflict
Rudy did a good job in NYC, but honestly, I spend every day in NYC, and being mayor of NYC does not prepare you for the white house. If your looking for executive experience, Romney or McCain would be a better choice.
Don't discount Ron Paul's experience. Unlike Romney he wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Yet, he created his own business as an OB/GYN, served his country in the military and congress, and educated himself on economics. He really is a great man.
I think you should support him because he will cut government more than any other candidate. You can trust him to do that, because he's been voting for government cuts in congress for years.
The greatest threat to this country is socialist programs and economic mismanagement. Medicare and social security will break us if we continue our current course of out of control spending. As we're seeing in the market now, loose fed policy can really hurt our economy as well. If you vote for Ron Paul, you're voting for a candidate with a deep understanding of economics, and someone who will always vote for what is right. Unlike many of the candidates he doesn't switch positions for political gain, if you haven't noticed by his Iraq war stance.
Don't take my word for it, read his own writings:
http://www.house.gov/paul/
You can see what he was writing about years ago. You can read his statements warning of terrorism against us before 9/11. You can read him months ago talking about the housing bubble and inflation when every other candidate was saying "The economy is fine!". Most of all, you can get an in-depth review of where he stands on every issue, and where he's stood for years now.
That is how I found out about Ron Paul, and that was 2 years ago!
Anyway, welcome to RonPaulForums. It can get a little rough here, don't let any of the others scare you off though.
At some point, the Iraqi people will have to defend themselves, against themselves. I understand your sympathy for the Iraqi people, but what about America? How much money can we spend to try to keep two groups of people, who've hated each other for hundreds of years, from killing one another? How many American soldiers should we lose to try to get these people to get along? To give them the liberty the do not desire and will not fight for?
We talk about giving the Iraqi's freedom, but isn't true freedom self-determination? What I mean by that is, if they want a theocracy, shouldn't we let them have it?
I'm going to basically repeat myself here, but how much American money, and how many American lives should we sacrifice to try to save the Sunni from the Shia?
Iraq and Afghanistan are two very different countries. I could point to various things that show progress is pretty bad in Afghanistan, but think about this...The Afghanistan government was going to kill a christian for trying to convert people there. Is that the kind of government America should be spending money to keep afloat?
China/Taiwan is a tough call. On one hand, we want to promote democracy, but on the other hand, we have to go back to my original question. Is it worth it? For me, the first question that should be asked about any policy is does this benefit America? America should always come first.
Really, I don't think China will attack Taiwan at this point. That would endanger good relations with the US, and their economy is predicated on us buying their cheap goods.
Lets look at it from the other point of view. If the cost of defending Taiwan is the loss of California to a nuclear strike, is it worth it?
Yes, he wants to eliminate the federal income tax. This would send government revenue back to the levels of the mid-90's. Government would still function, they'd just have to be fiscally responsible and cut some programs.
Paul doesn't want to switch to the gold standard, he wants to create a second currency, basically a gold backed dollar, and you could choose which one you wanted. Both would be legal tender, and the market would decide. Personally, I'd like some of the gold backed dollars, as they would be a good hedge against inflation.
It depends, the fair tax has it's supporters and its detractors. Ron Paul doesn't want the Fair tax. He wants to get rid of federal income tax period.
Sending them back wouldn't ruin our economy. Don't believe the propaganda that there are jobs Americans won't do. Americans are better than that, and our politicians who pimp that line are slandering us as a people.
Ron Paul's plan on immigration is simple, deny illegals all benefits. No free schooling, No free healthcare, no welfare, and fine businesses who hire them. If they can't get work, and they can't get free stuff, they will go home willingly.
I don't know where you are from, but three hospitals in my state have closed recently, due to the influx of people (mostly illegals) who use hospitals as their primary care physicians.
Heroin would actually be the worst.
Notice however, that even though we have the strict drug laws, they're still ruining lives. If we made things legal, do you think it would change anything all that much?
The other problem is how much power you give to the government. While maybe you and I find heroin being banned a good thing. Of course, then our tax money is spent to jail marijuana users as well. At one point they even banned drinking! That is the real problem, whenever you involve the government in anything, it always expands to take away as much freedom as it can get away with. It's not just the freedom of the user either, it's our tax money they take, thus taking away our ability to spend the money as we see fit.
While Ron Paul's positions are unique to him, he isn't unlike some other conservatives that have run. Take for example, Pat Buchanan's presidential runs in 1992, 1996 and 2000. While they don't agree on everything (Pat is a wee bit protectionist, and isn't as anti-intervention as Ron Paul) they agree on a lot.
To put it simply, the conservative party is divided. In one camp is the neoconservatives, who believe in an aggressive foreign policy, free trade at all costs, and a bit of liberalism on social issues and spending. On the other side is the paleoconservatives and paleolibertarians who believe in cutting government (departments!), an America First foreign policy, and traditional stances on social issues.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservative_-_Paleoconservative_Conflict
Rudy did a good job in NYC, but honestly, I spend every day in NYC, and being mayor of NYC does not prepare you for the white house. If your looking for executive experience, Romney or McCain would be a better choice.
Don't discount Ron Paul's experience. Unlike Romney he wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Yet, he created his own business as an OB/GYN, served his country in the military and congress, and educated himself on economics. He really is a great man.
I think you should support him because he will cut government more than any other candidate. You can trust him to do that, because he's been voting for government cuts in congress for years.
The greatest threat to this country is socialist programs and economic mismanagement. Medicare and social security will break us if we continue our current course of out of control spending. As we're seeing in the market now, loose fed policy can really hurt our economy as well. If you vote for Ron Paul, you're voting for a candidate with a deep understanding of economics, and someone who will always vote for what is right. Unlike many of the candidates he doesn't switch positions for political gain, if you haven't noticed by his Iraq war stance.
Don't take my word for it, read his own writings:
http://www.house.gov/paul/
You can see what he was writing about years ago. You can read his statements warning of terrorism against us before 9/11. You can read him months ago talking about the housing bubble and inflation when every other candidate was saying "The economy is fine!". Most of all, you can get an in-depth review of where he stands on every issue, and where he's stood for years now.
That is how I found out about Ron Paul, and that was 2 years ago!
Anyway, welcome to RonPaulForums. It can get a little rough here, don't let any of the others scare you off though.
amy31416
Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2007
- Messages
- 22,978
Thanks for being here and sharing your views. You've gotten a lot of good responses to your questions, they're all valid concerns, in my opinion. So I'll just give my response to one of your concerns because it's also a concern of mine.
Ending the drug war does not automatically make these and other drugs legal. Just like alcohol and tobacco are state-regulated, crystal meth would be as well and I, for one, cannot imagine what state in their right mind would EVER legalize this crap.
In a perfect world, everyone's educated enough to know to never go near that stuff. It's not a perfect world, but the laws now in place will not protect the stupid from themselves. And sometimes it's not sheer stupidity, it's just kids "experimenting" the laws don't help them by throwing them in jail.
My best friend in HS was put in jail, just after graduation because he was stupid and got caught with a large amount of marijuana. He went in a happy go-lucky kid with a great personality, he was going to go to college and he came out a couple years later a hardened person, very self-destructive. In the years since, he's been arrested a bunch of times for stupid, stupid things and I think that it's part of the self-destructive streak he developed while in jail.
He was a good kid, no worse than me except that I didn't like pot. I went on to get a BS and an MS, have a career, maybe even family some day. While he was in jail, I wrote to him and saw his personality slowly change and I feel like he died in there and this other guy emerged.
So, anyways, the States will regulate and I think that those who get caught doing drugs should have the alternative to go into a substance abuse treatment rather than jail. I support jail for those caught manufacturing or trafficking things like meth or heroin and would make sure my state reps knew it and enforced it. I wouldn't support marijuana growers going to jail, but I would support them being taxed at the state level, just like cigarettes, alcohol, etc.
Good luck with your choice. As you know, it's a very important one.
