Thread: Everyoneloves Ron Paul

We do not have enough oil to meet our needs.

We do not have enough oil to meet our needs.

There is a difference of opinion on that. I have had people in the business tell me otherwise.

How would we know?

As I said, oil companies are global corporations. They get their oil wherever they wish and wherever it will make them the most money.

Right now, they want to keep us scared that America has no oil and we must pay a premium for ME oil. If we had oil fields opened up in America, we certainly wouldn't be willing to pay $3 a gallon.

When giving thought to these things, I always ask myself who is making money and how.

If we truly don't have enough oil - and the ME is pumping really fast - why wouldn't this country be working fast and furious on alternative energy?
Saudia Arabia is not happy with us, Iran could stop selling us oil, Venezuela could do the same and Mexico would if we sent their people home - where would that leave us? There is no way the rest of the world would let us just have all that oil in Iraq for our own use.

So, given that scenario, if we truly had a lack of oil here in America and the ME situation is a little iffy, would the big guys actually risk having an American with no energy? I don't think so.

I think it's because they know we have oil - and it could probably be in the pipeline in a matter of days.

Originally Posted by usanevada

Well , all of America just got to see him on the debate
and he just comes off as a loon , I'm sorry but thats how
he looks to me

Then you must be Jane or Joe sixpack.

Originally Posted by usanevada

On immigration tonight he did fine but when he gets on foreign policy it all falls apart ,
I think he offends countries that are our friends and comes across as an isolationist ,
He also stated tonight that no other countries are being attacked by islam and its our policies that are making them attack us, that isn't true , Several countries have been attacked by Islamic radicals in the last few years

1. If I was a rich man I would choose my friends very carefully and AVOID those who were only my friends as long as I was footing the bill.

2. If you get the impression that Ron Paul is an isolationist you're not paying attention.

3. The 'Other' countries attacked by radical islomofacsicts were allied with us, that or they have allowed large immigrant populations of islamists in their countries. Personally I think it is BOTH!

Originally Posted by tinybobidaho

UsaNevada, you said Ron Paul offends other countries, but on the contrary, they appear to love him. It's not hard to find this out, just do a little research. And, also, I was watching, I think CNN today and our media was interviewing reporters from around the world, and the majority said their countries favored Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is not a loon. He's a very intelligent man and is well versed on the issues and I believe he understand the disaterous direction this country is taking more than the other candidates. Everyone kept bumping him out of the conversation tonight because they all know he's a threat. Their snickering at him was very juvenile in my opinion, and only made themselves look pathetic. Paul had the dignity to treat them with respect.

I agree. Everytime Ron Paul got to speak, the rest on the panel made faces and snickered like he was some kind of a nut. What do you think this does to viewers when they see this going on? I know it made me mad, but I know it probably made some people watching the show feel that Ron Paul is goofy. I was ESPECIALLY MAD AT McCAIN, who made a "retarded" face at Ron Paul when he interrupted him with a comment. And the audience laughed. McCain makes me sick!
Ron Paul is extremely intelligent and is prepared to ANSWER questions, not waffle. His foreign policy is head on. America should butt out of countries where we don't belong. That is what makes the islamists so angry. America doesn't have the right to SPREAD DEMOCRACY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, if some countries simply don't want that form of government. It isn't our job and it is none of our business.

Originally Posted by totallybeachin

It seems to me that all the "polls" and "unofficial" whatevers that are posted online shows that Ron Paul is the favorite. All Over the internet. So why is he so far behind the other canidate's? How does that work/calculate? Is there certain guidelines or something to be considered "a favorite" amoung the TV news people?

Wolf Blitzer just quoted somebody who said that Paul's campaign has a great bankroll, amazing amounts of enthusiastic supporters, but no definite plan to win.

I fear he might have nailed it. Paul has a popular message - freedom appeals to Americans - but a weak campaign.

Then you must be Jane or Joe sixpack.

Who is this Jane and Joe Sixpac, we are always hearing about.

Why do you think they won't respond to Ron Paul?

Just wondering?

If the man has a great bankroll - and enthusiastic supporters - and lots of them it seems - then he must have a fairly good campaign going.

I would suppose his plan for winning is to put the message out there, try to let the American people know there are alternatives to the suicidal policies we have. To let them know we must go back to our roots, consitutionally speaking, and common sense and let them make the decision.

What exactly is a good campaign? Treating the American people like dolts, making sure one's hair is styled, making fun of the other candidates? Being the darling of the media?

A good campaign to me is making your beliefs and ideas clear to me and giving me the courtesy of respecting me as a intelligent human being - not some team supporter who will be swayed by spin, sound bites and buzz words - or professional cheerleaders.

We have had people who win that way - and look what is happening to us?

Originally Posted by usanevada

On immigration tonight he did fine but when he gets on foreign policy it all falls apart ,
I think he offends countries that are our friends and comes across as an isolationist ,
He also stated tonight that no other countries are being attacked by islam and its our policies that are making them attack us, that isn't true , Several countries have been attacked by islamic radicals in the last few years

You must not travel internationally very much. We are perceived as bullies, not saviors. Even our allies have a certain disdain in them that wasn't there 10-15 years ago.

We are on a path to endless war, and we are attacking countries that have not attacked us, countries that do not even pose any threat to us.

The other countries that were attacked had troops in Iraq with us. The terrorists specifically said that's why they were attacked.

Bin Laden said we were attacked on 9-11 because we had built, and were occupying, an Air Force Base on holy land in the Saudi Peninsula. Bin Laden was actually more ticked at the Saudis, but could not bomb Muslim holy land, so he went after us.

That's also exactly what the Saudi prince said when he tried to hand Giuliani that check. He said that some radical factions were extremely upset because they perceived the base as placing Christian troops on Muslim soil.

None of that excuses murdering more than 3,000 innocent Americans.

Note that Bush handed that base over to the Saudis in 2003. So we are no longer occupying that land, although we are planning on staying in Iraq and Afghanistan for eternity now.

If the Mexicans started building a compound here, and President Bush gave them some national parkland to do so, how would we react?

If a radical group of Americans started using force to force those foreign nationals from our soil, I think a certain sector of the population would privately cheer. A smaller sector would seek them out and join them.

That group would be the rough equivalent of the radical Muslims.

Ron Paul has been endorsed by Michael Scheurer, a former CIA agent who was their Bin Laden and Islamic Fascism expert for a lot years. When he realized how we were being manipulated, he resigned and wrote his first book, under an anonymous name.

I volunteer in Ron Paul's campaign, and I twice I have had immigrants from Poland and Russia respectively tell me essentially that they are proud to have chosen this country, and they are aghast that the people who were born here can be so blind to what we are doing in the rest of the world, and what the government is doing to us.

I love my country, and I want it to be a strong, proud beacon of peace and prosperity. We cannot achieve that by bankrupting ourselves with endless war, which is, by the way, exactly what brought Russia down.

Originally Posted by nntrixie

If the man has a great bankroll - and enthusiastic supporters - and lots of them it seems - then he must have a fairly good campaign going.

I think that Congressman Paul is as much surprised by his success as anybody. It is largely a grassroots, bottom up structure.

He had 30,000 people pledged to vote for him in Iowa, but only 10,000 showed up.

If I knew how to run a successful political campaign, I might have a better answer, but I don't. I do think that he is having a hard time getting people off the internet and out to reach other voters. Only 35% of the work force is internet savvy, so there is a lot of work to do.

I wear Ron Paul buttons all the time, and I get a lot of "Who Is Ron Paul?"

Bren, we have plenty of oil to take care of this country. Unfortunately, it's shipped off to Japan instead of keeping it here because they get more money for it. That's why our prices won't come down. The oil gurus are enjoying this. Didn't they just open a new oil rig in the gulf? Where do you suppose that goes? Texas supplies their own oil for their state and sells off what they don't use. They don't distribute it to the other states, which I think is wrong.

I was in Saudi Arabia for almost 4 years. We didn't have a base. We lived on an American compound that was situated inside King Khalid's Air Force Base. We only had TDY Air Force personel coming in for one year stretches. Is this what they are calling a US military base?