Thread: One Reason Ron Paul Is Popular

One Reason Ron Paul Is Popular
Posted by Lew Rockwell at December 21,

(Heidi Fleiss lives there),
Writes Tucker Carlson in The New Republic: "he first thing I learned from driving around Nevada with Ron Paul for a couple of days: People really hate the Federal Reserve. This became clear midway through a speech Paul was giving to a group of Republicans at a community center in Pahrump, a dusty town about 60 miles west of Las Vegas. Pahrump is known for its legal brothels (Heidi Fleiss lives there), but most of the people in the audience looked more like ranchers than swingers. They stood five deep at the back of the room and listened politely as the candidate spoke.

"Until Paul got to the part about the Fed. 'We need a much better monetary system,' he said, a system based on "sound money, money that's backed by something.' Paul, who is small and delicate and has a high voice, spoke in a near monotone, making no effort to excite the audience. They cheered anyway. Then he said this: 'The Constitution gives no authority for a central bank.' The crowd went wild, or as wild as a group of sober Republicans can on a Monday night. They hooted and yelled and stomped their feet. Paul stopped speaking for a moment, his words drowned out. Then he continued on about monetary policy.

"Wow, I thought. The constitutionality of a central bank is not an issue you see on many lists of voter concerns. (How many pollsters would think to ask about it? How many voters would understand the question?) Yet a room full of non-economists had just responded feverishly when Paul brought it up. Hoping for some context, I went outside and found a Paul staffer. He didn't sound surprised when I told him about the speech. 'It's our biggest applause line,' he said. Read the rest. (Thanks to Eric Garris.)



This ALIPAC member has posted this entity be it editorial opinion, news article, column, or web creation as information for the General Population (public) only. It is not intended as an endorsement for this candidate by this poster. Its use here has not been anticipated to be used as, or used to discredit any candidate mentioned herewith.

The truth of the matter is, most middle class Americans know very little about the Federal Reserve or its function.

IMO, if any one position could be used to define Paul's ability to draw supporters it would be his position on the war.

Originally Posted by MW

The truth of the matter is, most middle class Americans know very little about the Federal Reserve or its function.

IMO, if any one position could be used to define Paul's ability to draw supporters it would be his position on the war.

And thats where I think you're wrong MW with your witchhunt. It's not just his position on the war it's his position on the current direction that our government is on. People are tired of our elected officials not paying attention to the very people that put them there and Dr Paul is advocating a new direction unlike all of the other candidates.

Originally Posted by MW

The truth of the matter is, most middle class Americans know very little about the Federal Reserve or its function.

IMO, if any one position could be used to define Paul's ability to draw supporters it would be his position on the war.

I agree, but
I don’t think there are enough anti war types to get him in the election as a republican, On that issue alone.

America understands the position we are in, maybe not agree with it, but most understand it as a right now necessity.

And I'll ask it again in THIS thread...

Why is it 'necessary'?

All of the objectives that were laid out before we went into Iraq have been achieved.
1. Hussein (and sons) GONE
2. WMD's GONE
3. Elections DONE

What the hell is left?

14 bases and a humongous embassy to build.

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

And I'll ask it again in THIS thread...

Why is it 'necessary'?

All of the objectives that were laid out before we went into Iraq have been achieved.
1. Hussein (and sons) GONE
2. WMD's GONE
3. Elections DONE

What the hell is left?

Ya - are we supposed to stay there and hand hold and baby-sit. What did Iraq do before Bush and the congress decided to ethnic cleanz Iraq in the name of freedom/democrazy?

You know...if people here want to be at war with someone how about China? How about lets pick a fight with them... their nuts...thats good enough reason.

Once the pro war people begin to as themselves -

'Wait a minute, this man who is selling out our country, giving it to the illegals, putting in place a national ID, a huge highway through our country for foreign countries to use, put in place the Patriot Act, and on and on - this is the same man that we are listening to about this war??'

'This is the man who wanted to put Dubai in charge of port security?'

How does one trust this man about the war being 'to keep us safe' - when he has had the border open - and welcoming for all this time.

He is giving us away, selling us, filling our country with foreigners, etc.

Yet he has our best interests at heart in Iraq?

People, that makes no sense.

You can't have it both ways -