Thread: I Was Wrong About Ron Paul On Immigration

Originally Posted by nntrixie

Why denigrate Paul - and use the phrase 'cut and run' ....

uhmmm... some here think America should be an empire and that war is a republican venture. Some people think what the GOP establishment tell them contrary to the facts that Ron Paul has garnered MORE DONATIONS FROM MILITARY PERSONAL THAN ANY OTHER CANDIDATE.

I guess the GOP elites who control the puppet strings have it right and label it "cut and run" to denote something negative, while the real heroes - the troops, support Ron Paul overwhelmingly...

go figure.

Also, for someone to suggest Ron would support the NAU is absolutely LUDICROUS. Infact, two of the most prominent websites that expose the NAU, SUPPORT RON PAUL. There is a reason for this. Ron Paul has been talking of the NAU for YEARS!!!!!!!! INFACT, Ron Paul VEHEMTLY OPPOSES THE NAU - because it supercedes the Sovereignty of the United States.

It would be good to get informed on Ron Pauls stances before you comment.

I'm going to disagree a little on the President not being responsible for the trade deals.

In a perfect world, where everything was done by the book, that would be true. But we are no where near that.

The President has tremendous power regarding trade deals - he shouldn't have - but he does.

Another think the PResident has is the ability to go to the people and get them in his/her camp and get them to pressure their elected lawmakers.
Pres. Bush used this to a fairthewell, beating the drums for war.

NAFTA was a bi-partisan effort. While I don't mind laying a lot of our problems at Pres. Clinton's doorstep, NAFTA was touted before Clinton came into office. He was just the one to sign it. Ronald Reagon liked it a lot. It was supposed to end illegal immigration.

Originally Posted by chrismatthews

a couple of things i wanted to point out, in case they havent already been.

Dr. Paul changed his position on the fence because it was pointed out that much of the land slated to be built on would be taken by eminent domain. So while he doesn't support the fence, it's not necessarily spaeking to his commitment on illegal immigration.

As for tarrifs, he supports a unified tarrif system, when he says "fair" he means that the tarrifs are applied abroad the entire spectrum as opposed to subvening one industry over the other. agree or disagree i just wanted to firm up his position on those issues.

Another great first post from a new ALIPACer! Welcome chris!!

Originally Posted by SOSADFORUS

Originally Posted by specsaregood

Thank you for the warm welcome.

I happened to read "Gold, Peace, and Prosperity" by Ron Paul last week. It is 52 pages of "pure gold", pardon the pun. It really explains the core basis for his belief structure and details through history how monetary policy and fiat money has been the instrument of tyranny. Once you understand his thoughts on that, every thing else he does just makes sense.

Here is a little tidbit from the book(really more of a pamphlet).
"The monetary reforms drawn up at Bretton Woods, NH, in July 1944 were supposed to be permanent. The agreement lasted 27 years. Harry Dexter White, Director of Monetary Research for the Treasure was the U.S. Representative. (Mr. White was later identified as a high-level fellow traveler of the Communist Party.)"

Liberty and Freedom cannot exist for long without "honest money".

I will have to find that book so I can read it...thanks

I was thinking the same...thank you for the information.

Hello, Chris and Welcome!!

a couple of things i wanted to point out, in case they havent already been.

Dr. Paul changed his position on the fence because it was pointed out that much of the land slated to be built on would be taken by eminent domain. So while he doesn't support the fence, it's not necessarily spaeking to his commitment on illegal immigration.

As for tarrifs, he supports a unified tarrif system, when he says "fair" he means that the tarrifs are applied abroad the entire spectrum as opposed to subvening one industry over the other. agree or disagree i just wanted to firm up his position on those issues.


That's a thought. He might also have realized it was a kind of show and tell vote anyway. WE have recently seen congress' committment to the fence.

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

Originally Posted by chrismatthews

a couple of things i wanted to point out, in case they havent already been.

Dr. Paul changed his position on the fence because it was pointed out that much of the land slated to be built on would be taken by eminent domain. So while he doesn't support the fence, it's not necessarily spaeking to his commitment on illegal immigration.

As for tarrifs, he supports a unified tarrif system, when he says "fair" he means that the tarrifs are applied abroad the entire spectrum as opposed to subvening one industry over the other. agree or disagree i just wanted to firm up his position on those issues.

Another great first post from a new ALIPACer! Welcome chris!!

thank you

chrismatthews wrote:

Dr. Paul changed his position on the fence because it was pointed out that much of the land slated to be built on would be taken by eminent domain.

Paul voted against the fence before he voted for it. He voted against the fence in 2005, then turned around and voted for it in 2006. That doesn't exactly line up with your suggestion that he changed his mind because of eminent domain issues.

He compares eating too many twinkies with illegal drugs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88REf0tjZHo

If he doesn’t care about illegal drugs coming across the border surly won’t not care about illegal people or building the fence. I guess you can call this having more liberties which means no government and let free will shine. Like he said go back to the early 1900’s when the rich had the liberties to rule as they please

Thanks for that video, I LOVE it!!

"Why don't they put you on a diet, you're a little overweight!"

Originally Posted by specsaregood

Our Federal Reserve system and "fiat money" are responsible for our job loss, not free trade.

Sorry your're FLAT wrong.