Page 85 of 740 FirstFirst ... 357581828384858687888995135185585 ... LastLast
Results 841 to 850 of 7393
Like Tree19Likes

Thread: Ron Paul on the Issues

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

  1. #841
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #842
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Paul vs. Fed, USA Today

    January 11, 2012 by Sam Rolley


    Ron Paul showed that the constant campaigning has not taken his mind off of one issue that he has spoken about for years.

    On Tuesday, as voters in New Hampshire were getting ready to make their choice for the Republican Presidential nominee, candidate Ron Paul set his sights on a familiar foe.

    In a USA Today op-ed, Paul showed that the constant campaigning has not taken his mind off of one issue he has spoken about for years: the Federal Reserve’s manipulation of financial markets.

    “Throughout its nearly 100-year history, the Federal Reserve has presided over the near-complete destruction of the United States dollar. Since 1913, the dollar has lost over 95% of its purchasing power, aided and abetted by the Fed’s loose monetary policy,” Paul writes.

    Along with Paul’s piece the newspaper ran an editorial calling the candidate’s wishes to audit and end the Fed “19th century economic ideas.”
    The editorial calls the Federal Reserve vital to the U.S. economy:

    “The value of a politically independent central bank has been proven repeatedly since then. When Lehman Bros. failed in September 2008, it was Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke who played a key role in preventing the other investment banks from collapsing like a row of dominoes. By late 2008 and early 2009, banks had become so averse to lending that even blue-chip industrial companies such as General Electric, Caterpillar, Verizon and Harley Davidson relied on the Fed to finance their day-to-day operations.”

    But Paul, in his writing, disagrees: “To say that auditing or ending the Federal Reserve reflects ‘19th century thinking’ is to propose that economic responsibility and transparency in government are ideas whose time has passed.”

    Paul vs. Fed, USA Today : Personal Liberty Digest™=
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #843
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Obama or More of the Same

    11 January 2012
    20 Comments
    By Greg Hunter

    Mitt Romney Wins in NH


    Mitt Romney, who finished first in New Hampshire last night, got a raw deal from the mainstream media (MSM) and his Republican opponents about a comment that was totally taken out of context. It was reported that Mitt Romney said, “I like to fire people.” That would make you think he was some sort of cold hearted person who doesn’t care about people. What Romney actually said was in the context of health care providers and being able to fire companies who give you bad service. Romney actually said, “I like to be able to fire people who provide services to me.” (Click here to hear Romney for yourself.) I agree with Romney on this one. This was a totally false representation of what Governor Romney said, and everyone who carried this story and used this in a campaign should be ashamed.


    Yesterday, FOX News came to Romney’s defense and rightly so. FOX gave wall-to-wall coverage defending this injustice, but the “Fair and balanced” network does not apply its righteousness evenly. What about Congressman Ron Paul? Many on the MSM and FOX have ignored the presidential candidate. Some on FOX, such as Judge Andrew Napolitano, have given the Congressman a fair shake, but many have not. Where was FOX when The CBS “Early Show” left out Ron Paul in a poll done by Suffolk University right after the Iowa Caucuses? Chief Political Correspondent Jan Crawford said, “A new Suffolk University poll shows him (Romney) with a commanding lead in New Hampshire at almost 30 points above his rivals.” (Click here and see this biased report from CBS.)


    CBS should fire Crawford, the network’s “Chief Political Correspondent,” for two reasons. Reason one, for being politically biased in leaving Dr. Paulout of her story even though he held second place in the Suffolk University poll! The second reason CBS should fire Crawford is because she is an idiot who can’t do second grade math. The poll totaled only 65% without Paul. If you are going to do someone in, at least be clever, but I digress. Why aren’t the people at FOX defending Paul, a Republican? I think it is because many on that network do not want him to get the GOP nomination. FOX News made a lot of time to talk to Rick Perry, who finished dead last, but Congressman Paul, who finished a respectable second, got about a minute at around 11:20pm and then was talked about a little more after that. “Fair and balanced”? FOX should retire that slogan. If you are a news organization, you cannot be “Fair and balanced” to only the people you like.

    I don’t think either party wants Paul to be the GOP candidate. Republican and Democratic special interests know both will take a hit under a President Paul. Republicans, like Romney, will not rein in the banks, stop the ongoing bailouts or truly clean up the kleptocracy we call a financial system. Obama surely won’t either because he said to reporter Steve Kroft, last December, on “60 Minutes, “I can tell you, just from 40,000 feet, that some of the most damaging behavior on Wall Street, in some cases, some of the least ethical behavior on Wall Street, wasn’t illegal.” Kroft didn’t bother to challenge the President, even though he did an expose’ on widespread and systemic mortgage fraud earlier last year. (Click here for more of this disgusting story.)

    I think Romney will end up the GOP nominee, but I have serious doubts he can defeat Obama and his nearly $1billion war chest. It will also take more than money to replace the President. Romney’s main strength is corporate America and its “Super PACs.” Paul probably would have a better chance of winning. Paul gets about 50% of the youth vote. It’s hard for the GOP to comprehend that young people respect Paul, and he’s 76 years old! I think it is also safe to say that liberal Democrats will not vote for Romney, but Paul on the other hand, would take some votes away from the President’s base. I mean, let’s face it, a candidate that wants less war and less of the Federal Reserve will appeal to liberals disillusioned with Obama. Also, consider the “Indefinite Detention” bill the President just signed into law on New Year’s Eve. The ACLU says this legislation guts the Constitution, and you just can’t get more liberal than these folks. The left is not happy with Obama’s unyielding support for Wall Street which is a big campaign donor. Wall Street knows how to rig the game and contributes just as much to the Republicans. Mitt Romney is their GOP poster boy. So, if Romney gets the Republican nomination, and it’s not over just yet, the choice will be Obama and more of the same.

    Obama or More of the Same | Greg Hunter
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #844
    Guest
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,266
    Senator Jim DeMint: Listen to Ron Paul

    In 1975 the Republican Party and the conservative movement in general in the U.S. were still close enough to the original principles of the American conservatism and the ideology of the Founding Fathers for Ronald Reagan to be able to write the following words:

    If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

    There was no reaction against these words of Reagan at the time. All Republicans understood that Reagan was right, and that he wasn’t inventing a new Republicanism but only following in the steps of the previous generations of true conservatives. While libertarianism has different shades and different views about specific points of policy, conservatives at the time knew that conservatism and libertarianism are the same. Five years later, Reagan won the elections and change the course of America. It is debatable whether his policies really followed his rhetoric. But still, the libertarian ideas were conservative ideas, period, and no Republican at the time could get in trouble or be spoken of negatively is they professed libertarian ideas.

    It is in the tradition of Ronald Reagan that Senator Jim DeMint, the man in Washington DC with the greatest political contribution to the Tea Party movement in the last elections, the most conservative member of the Senate, warned the Republican Party that saying negative things about Ron Paul hurts the Republican Party. While the Republican establishment has been eager to point to Ron Paul’s libertarianism as a “proof” that he is not a true conservative (what would they say to Reagan then?), Jim DeMint called the party back to its true ideological roots. He said that the refusal of the other candidates to listen to Ron Paul is to “our detriment.” Jim DeMint added the most interesting comment one can find these days within the Republican field, that the debate within the Republican Party he is most comfortable with is between conservatives and libertarians.

    This must give food for thought to the more conservative voters in the Republican Party. So far the establishment has been dismissing Ron Paul, but every alternative candidate has a record of big-government statism and business as usual. Some like Santorum have even openly declared that one of the foundational rights given by our Creator, as written in the Declaration of Independence – the Pursuit of Happiness – is what is destroying America. Others, like Gingrich, have worked to introduce legislation to make internal passports compulsory for all Americans within the United States. Of course, at the end, the call for more government intervention in the society is not different from the liberals’ own version of statism – or the differences are only in the details but not in principle.

    DeMint may have another point too: The astounding difference in the average age of the voters for Ron Paul and the voters for the establishment candidates. The establishment likes to dismiss this with the words, “Ah, young people just want legal weed.” But such demeaning attitude won’t help the GOP. In a few years, the party’s main adversary will be the average life-span in the US, not any political opponent; the only mass influx of fresh blood is through the Ron Paul rallies. Alienating these crowds of enthusiastic young people may prove to sign the death certificate for the GOP in the next few years. And contrary to the establishment propaganda, these young people don’t “just want legal weed.” They want much more: liberty. And they see that liberty in the old conservative principles that Reagan wrote about, and Ron Paul is preaching and defending.

    Jim DeMint, after all these years in the Senate, has proven to be a wise man of strong convictions. When the Republican field was still uncertain as to what they should do about the Tea Party, and even Michelle Bachmann was debating whether she should speak to the Tea Party rallies, DeMint threw his full weight of a conservative politician behind it, calling the Tea Party a “spiritual revival,” and that “people are awaking to the fact that government is not and can not be god.” And now, while disagreeing with Ron Paul on specific points, DeMint is able to see that only the message of liberty can save the Republican Party from its current state of a country club gerontocracy. The Republican establishment – and the Republican voters too – better take his advice.


    Read more: Senator Jim DeMint: Listen to Ron Paul Senator Jim DeMint: Listen to Ron Paul

  5. #845
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696


    WHY ARE REPUBLICAN ORGAN GRINDERS AGAINST RON PAUL?

    By Coach Dave Daubenmire
    January 12, 2012
    NewsWithViews.com

    Allow me to state right at the top that I am not endorsing Ron Paul.

    Although I am a registered Republican, and ran for Congress in 2010 as a Republican, I am not a Republican. In fact, I am not even sure what that means any more…being a Republican. As I wrote way back in 2008 in reference to the political parties:

    “It is like lying under a huge bug. Down on the ground where the bug’s feet are it looks like McCain and Obama are two different feet. But the farther up the legs you allow yourself to look you begin to realize that they really are nothing more than two legs connected to the same body.”

    In 2000 I made my mark for GW Bush. After waking up, in 2004 I cast a vote for Michael Peroutka. Dr. Alan Keyes was my choice in 2008. I always vote my conscience.

    About ten years ago I came to the realization that the “people” were not the one’s who chose the candidates. When the Republicans gave us John McCain four years ago I lost all doubt that the process was manipulated. The powers-that-be will do all that they can to prevent an outsider from becoming the President. They select and elevate their hand-picked choices and then manipulate us through the power of the media. On election-day they give us the privilege of choosing between a controlled-Republican candidate and a controlled-Democratic candidate.

    Either way, their guy wins.

    Tuesday night in New Hampshire Mitt Romney achieved an “historic victory” (at least that is the way they are selling it), and it “appears” he is running away with the nomination.
    Let me get this straight. Seventy-five percent of Iowa Republicans didn’t vote for him, and nearly sixty-two percent of Republicans in his home state chose another candidate, but he is the “clear frontrunner?” What if the second primary had been inTexas instead of NH?

    I would say that the voters in NH are more out of the mainstream than are the voters in Iowa. John Huntsman, who got a total of 745 votes in Iowa picked up nearly 17% of the vote in NH. Beam me up, Scotty!

    But the whole Ron Paul thing fascinates me. Could he REALLY change things? It seems to me, that after Romney, he has the most solid support of any candidate. And a recent CBS poll shows both Romney and Paul are capable of beating Obama. The polls don’t show Gingrich, Santorum, and Perry having a chance to win, but the media still claims that Paul is the only one “unelectable.”

    What if Newt, Perry and Santorum dropped out of the race? In a two-man race would the “conservatives” flock to Romney…or Paul? What if they went to Paul? Can Romney get above 50% with only one other candidate in the race? Are Newt, Perry, and Santorum only in the race to keep this scenario from happening?

    I’m sorry. That is just the way my mind works.

    Last week I wrote about the “Establishment” trying to control the election. Both parties want Mitt or Newt as the nominee. CNN is blasting Ron Paul, for Pete’s sake.

    Do you remember in the 2008 Republican Primary how Dr. Paul was ridiculed? They called him “Dr. No” because of his “no” votes against un-constitutional government. They laughed at him when he exposed The Federal Reserve and the danger of printing “fiat currency.” He spoke against the Patriot Act and stood for individual liberty. He was a vocal critic of the wars.

    Today, many of those positions have been adopted by the American People. His cut-the-government views area breath of fresh air to those who are sick and tired of government intervention in their lives.

    To be honest, there are several of his positions that cause me to scratch my head, but even his critics would have to admit that he has not waivered from his “libertarian” roots in his more than two-decades of government employment.

    In this age of acrobatic flip-flopping, Dr. No is still saying “No.” It appears to me that Dr. Paul cannot be bought. Most of the other candidates already have been. So, why do they hate him so much?

    Newt Gingrich recently said that Ron Paul would be a greater threat than another term of Barack Obama. Really? He can’t be serious…

    Could it be that he is as close to an outsider as anyone who has made it to the pinnacle of political power could be? Watch this brief Judge Napolitano video. (4 Minutes) It is powerful.
    Is it because he dare ask the question as to whether or not our “Israel first” foreign policy is best for America? How can we protect Israel if we don’t have the finances to remain strong at home? Do you really think radical Islam needs Iran to go nuclear so that they can get their hands on a bomb? Couldn’t they get one from Pakistan? Do you want your son to fight in Iran?

    Is it because he says that a bankrupt nation cannot continue to be the policeman of the world?

    Is it because his desire to return to the boundaries of the Constitution threaten the political forces that are making billions of dollars off of the backs of American citizens yet to be born? Beware the government-industrial-media complex. War is big-business.

    Is it because he questions whether invading other countries is the “Christian” thing to do? Except for his foreign policy, most of his positions are in line with main-stream Republican voters. In fact, many of his positions are attractive to Independants and conservative-Democrats who do not trust their party either.

    The political pundits are always talking about “big-tent” issues as a way to broaden the appeal to frustrated voters, yet they refuse to let Dr. Paul have a seat under their tent. Is the party made up of people or political power-brokers?

    Here is another CBS poll. Ron Paul is capturing 10% among Democrats, and nearly 47% among Independants. When you add in the vote of Republicans it sure seems to me that in a general election those would be some formidable numbers.

    But “conservatives” don’t cotton to Ron Paul. I wonder if that has anything to do with the picture that the “conservative” media has painted of him? Rush, Hannity, Levin, and Fox all speak disparagingly of him.

    So why are the Republican organ-grinders not interested in his “big tent’ approach if they are so interested in defeating Barack Obama? Could it be that they are looking for a “company man” to be the standard bearer?

    I recently saw that Donald Trump has re-registered as an Independent. Could he be trying to block Ron Paul from a third-party run?

    Look, I don’t care if the Republican Party wins…I want THE PEOPLE to win. Why are our only two choices establishment-favored Republicans or Obama? What if an amalgamation of voters, Republicans…frustrated Democrats, and Independents…chose the Republican nominee? I thought diversity was a good thing?

    With hundreds-of-millions to spend surely the Republican Party could engineer a campaign to take back the Whitehouse, with Ron Paul as the “man of the people” breaking the strangle-hold of the politically elite.

    But I don’t think that is what the Republican/Democrat political class wants. Conspiring in their under-ground bunkers, the power brokers have determined that they would rather have another four years of Obama, than a Republican that they can’t control.

    Does America need a game-changer, like Ron Paul…or another moderate Republican like Mitt Romney? Who is more likely to bring real change to America…Romney or Paul? Is it time to hit the “reboot” button.

    I am always telling you what I think…I’d love to hear what YOU think. Help me out here.What am I missing? coach@ptsalt.com

    Click Here
    for an audio version of this commentary.
    Order the CDs here.

    Do you think like a Christian or a humanist? Did the Founders really separate Church and State? Is Judicial tyranny ruining America? Check out these great teachings by the Coach

    © 2012 Dave Daubenmire - All Rights Reserved

    Coach Dave Daubenmire, founder and President of Pass The Salt Ministries www.ptsalt.com and Minutemen United www.minutemenunited.org, is host of the high octane Pass The Salt radio show heard in Columbus, Ohio.

    In 1999 Coach Daubenmire was sued by the ACLU for praying with his teams while coaching high school in Ohio. He now spends his energy fighting for Christian principles in the public domain.

    E-Mail: coach@ptsalt.com

    Dave Daubenmire -- Why are Republican organ grinders Against Ron Paul?

    http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave264.htm
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  6. #846
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Meet the White Obama

    Kurt Nimmo
    Infowars.com
    January 11, 2012

    Mitt Romney, the establishment declared GOP front-runner, is the white Obama. He earns this title because on crucial issues he mirrors Barack Obama. Consider:



    Climate agenda and carbon taxes:

    He has stated that the theory of anthropogenic global warming is real. In 2005, as governor of Massachusetts, Romney imposed strict state limitations on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. In a memo issued by Massachusetts Lieutenant Governor Kerry Hale, the Romney administration bragged that it was “the first and only state to set CO 2 emissions limits on power plants.”

    In short, Romney did what Obama’s EPA wants to do now. It is revealing that Romney was advised on this drastic step by none other than Obama’s chief science adviser, John Holdren.

    In his book, No Apology, Romney advocates carbon taxes through a “tax-swap plan” and declares that resultant “higher energy prices would encourage energy efficiency.” The plan is favored by economist and Romney adviser Greg Mankiw and many other “Republican-leaning economists.” In 2007, Mankiw wrote an op-ed for the New York Times entitled “One Answer to Global Warming: A New Tax.” He wrote that “if we want to reduce global emissions of carbon, we need a global carbon tax.”

    Obama also wants to push a carbon tax on the American people and declared his intention to do so before he took office. “President elect Barack Obama used his speech at a Los Angeles summit last night to reinvigorate a push for the revival of a frightening proposal to slash carbon emissions by 80 per cent, a move that would inflict a new Great Depression, cost millions of jobs, and sink America to near third world status,” Paul Joseph Watson wrote on November 19, 2008.

    Obama’s agenda to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent fits right into the globalist plan to attain the ultimate civilization-killing goal of zero carbon emissions, as espoused by the Carnegie Institute.


    Romneycare:


    In December, Romney told Fox News that he stands by the health care at gunpoint plan implemented while he was governor of Massachusetts. “The plan is not perfect, there are things that I’d change in it, but I’ll stand by the things we’ve done,” he said, defending the plan.

    Obama and the Democrats were so enthralled with Romney’s statist health care boondoggle, they based their plan on it.

    “Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act,” NBC reported last October.

    Abortion:

    Like a good Demopublican, Romney supported a woman’s “right” to kill her fetus – that is before, as a “conservative,” he changed his mind – or as it is usually called, he flip-flopped on the issue.

    He was so adamant about abortion, he attended a Planned Parenthood fundraiser in 2004, but now supports the Pence amendment sponsored by Indiana Republican Rep. Mike Pence aimed at eliminating all Title X grants for Planned Parenthood. He even instituted tax-funded abortion on demand two years after his orchestrated “pro-life” conversion.

    Obama, of course, is “pro-choice” and has appointed a number of outspoken pro-abortion advocates to his administration. If elected, no doubt Romney will do the same.

    Illegal immigration:

    Mitt claims to oppose illegal immigration, but does not advocate sending illegals back – or, apparently, even arresting them for breaking the law.

    “Those people that are here illegally today should have the opportunity to register and to have their status identified,” he said in November.

    He said nothing about illegal immigrants paying back taxes, learning English, not having criminal records, or being deported and going through legal channels for immigration.

    Romney sounds a lot like Obama, who said: “I think most Americans feel there should be an orderly process to do it. People shouldn’t just be coming here and cutting in front of the line essentially and staying without having gone through the proper channels.”

    Mitt Romney is basically indistinguishable from Obama and supports the same globalist agenda, albeit with “conservative” flourishes. His flip-flopping on key issues is designed to make his pre-arranged agenda more palatable to so-called conservatives, who will naturally be hoodwinked as they are every election cycle.

    If elected, Romney will become the white Obama. The only job requirement will be an ability to convincingly read a teleprompter and follow orders handed down form his globalist masters the same as his predecessor.

    » Meet the White Obama Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!


    1. Mitt Romney Aides Paid $97,000 To Erase His Governorship Records
    2. Obama to meet with Senate Democrats to push health care
    3. Romney Inevitability Prospect Forces Republicans to Choose
    4. Romney Gets Advice from Obama’s Creepy Science Czar
    5. Romney: Once a Warmonger, Always a Warmonger
    6. Bill O’Reilly Says “Fiscal Tough Guy” Romney Will Be Next President
    7. Santorum, Romney in virtual tie, with Ron Paul in third
    8. Obama or More of the Same?
    9. $7-A-Gallon Gas Needed to Meet Government’s CO2 Cuts
    10. Romney says Obama’s illegal-immigrant uncle should be deported
    11. The Big Takeaway From Iowa: 75 Percent Of Republicans Don’t Want Mitt Romney
    12. Obama Approval Drops 5 Percent to New Low Since Pro-Abortion Health Care Law
    Last edited by AirborneSapper7; 01-13-2012 at 12:20 PM.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  7. #847
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Meet the White Obama

    Kurt Nimmo
    Infowars.com
    January 11, 2012

    Mitt Romney, the establishment declared GOP front-runner, is the white Obama. He earns this title because on crucial issues he mirrors Barack Obama. Consider:



    Climate agenda and carbon taxes:

    He has stated that the theory of anthropogenic global warming is real. In 2005, as governor of Massachusetts, Romney imposed strict state limitations on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. In a memo issued by Massachusetts Lieutenant Governor Kerry Hale, the Romney administration bragged that it was “the first and only state to set CO 2 emissions limits on power plants.”

    In short, Romney did what Obama’s EPA wants to do now. It is revealing that Romney was advised on this drastic step by none other than Obama’s chief science adviser, John Holdren.

    In his book, No Apology, Romney advocates carbon taxes through a “tax-swap plan” and declares that resultant “higher energy prices would encourage energy efficiency.” The plan is favored by economist and Romney adviser Greg Mankiw and many other “Republican-leaning economists.” In 2007, Mankiw wrote an op-ed for the New York Times entitled “One Answer to Global Warming: A New Tax.” He wrote that “if we want to reduce global emissions of carbon, we need a global carbon tax.”

    Obama also wants to push a carbon tax on the American people and declared his intention to do so before he took office. “President elect Barack Obama used his speech at a Los Angeles summit last night to reinvigorate a push for the revival of a frightening proposal to slash carbon emissions by 80 per cent, a move that would inflict a new Great Depression, cost millions of jobs, and sink America to near third world status,” Paul Joseph Watson wrote on November 19, 2008.

    Obama’s agenda to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent fits right into the globalist plan to attain the ultimate civilization-killing goal of zero carbon emissions, as espoused by the Carnegie Institute.


    Romneycare:


    In December, Romney told Fox News that he stands by the health care at gunpoint plan implemented while he was governor of Massachusetts. “The plan is not perfect, there are things that I’d change in it, but I’ll stand by the things we’ve done,” he said, defending the plan.

    Obama and the Democrats were so enthralled with Romney’s statist health care boondoggle, they based their plan on it.

    “Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act,” NBC reported last October.

    Abortion:

    Like a good Demopublican, Romney supported a woman’s “right” to kill her fetus – that is before, as a “conservative,” he changed his mind – or as it is usually called, he flip-flopped on the issue.

    He was so adamant about abortion, he attended a Planned Parenthood fundraiser in 2004, but now supports the Pence amendment sponsored by Indiana Republican Rep. Mike Pence aimed at eliminating all Title X grants for Planned Parenthood. He even instituted tax-funded abortion on demand two years after his orchestrated “pro-life” conversion.

    Obama, of course, is “pro-choice” and has appointed a number of outspoken pro-abortion advocates to his administration. If elected, no doubt Romney will do the same.

    Illegal immigration:

    Mitt claims to oppose illegal immigration, but does not advocate sending illegals back – or, apparently, even arresting them for breaking the law.

    “Those people that are here illegally today should have the opportunity to register and to have their status identified,” he said in November.

    He said nothing about illegal immigrants paying back taxes, learning English, not having criminal records, or being deported and going through legal channels for immigration.

    Romney sounds a lot like Obama, who said: “I think most Americans feel there should be an orderly process to do it. People shouldn’t just be coming here and cutting in front of the line essentially and staying without having gone through the proper channels.”

    Mitt Romney is basically indistinguishable from Obama and supports the same globalist agenda, albeit with “conservative” flourishes. His flip-flopping on key issues is designed to make his pre-arranged agenda more palatable to so-called conservatives, who will naturally be hoodwinked as they are every election cycle.

    If elected, Romney will become the white Obama. The only job requirement will be an ability to convincingly read a teleprompter and follow orders handed down form his globalist masters the same as his predecessor.

    » Meet the White Obama Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!


    1. Mitt Romney Aides Paid $97,000 To Erase His Governorship Records
    2. Obama to meet with Senate Democrats to push health care
    3. Romney Inevitability Prospect Forces Republicans to Choose
    4. Romney Gets Advice from Obama’s Creepy Science Czar
    5. Romney: Once a Warmonger, Always a Warmonger
    6. Bill O’Reilly Says “Fiscal Tough Guy” Romney Will Be Next President
    7. Santorum, Romney in virtual tie, with Ron Paul in third
    8. Obama or More of the Same?
    9. $7-A-Gallon Gas Needed to Meet Government’s CO2 Cuts
    10. Romney says Obama’s illegal-immigrant uncle should be deported
    11. The Big Takeaway From Iowa: 75 Percent Of Republicans Don’t Want Mitt Romney
    12. Obama Approval Drops 5 Percent to New Low Since Pro-Abortion Health Care Law
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  8. #848
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Nationwide Poll: Ron Paul Surges Into Second

    Five point gain means Paul is tied in second place overall with Independents and Republicans

    Steve Watson
    Infowars.com
    January 12, 2012




    Following his effective tied win in Iowa, GOP candidate Ron Paul has seen a surge in popularity nationally according to an influential poll released this week.

    Paul is now tied for second place nationally among Republicans and Independents, according to the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll.

    The Texas Congressman now stands at 17 percent, according to the poll, tied with Newt Gingrich. The notable trend, however, is that while Paul has jumped a full five percentage points since December, Gingrich has plummeted by 8 points.

    Among Republican voters alone, Paul has jumped by 4 points nationally and now stands at 16 percent. Gingrich again slipped by 8 points among Republicans alone, leaving him at 20 percent.
    Mitt Romney still holds a considerable lead with 29 percent among republicans and Independents and 30 percent among Republicans alone.


    The poll was conducted before Ron Paul’s strong second place showing in New Hampshire. It now appears that Gingrich finished fifth in New Hampshire, behind Rick Santorum, with around 9 percent. Given these statistics, Paul is likely to surge further nationally and Gingrich is likely to slip even further.

    Another notable finding from the poll is that Paul is second only to Romney when it comes to a head to head match up with Obama.

    Obama bests Romney by 5 percentage points, 48 to 43. Paul falls short of Obama by 7 percentage points, 48 to 41. In comparison, Santorum loses by 11 percentage points, 51 to 40 and Gingrich loses by 15 percentage points, 53 to 38.


    When factoring in Democrat voters who are disillusioned with Obama, Paul’s numbers will undoubtedly increase once more.

    Indeed, as Neil Cavuto explains below, it is Ron Paul who is the major threat to Obama, more so than Mitt Romney:



    » Nationwide Poll: Ron Paul Surges Into Second Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  9. #849
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Ron Paul Has Won: Young People Engage With Liberty, Limited Government, Sound Money, Anti-War Principles

    The next generation of leaders in America are Ron Paul fans

    Steve Watson
    Infowars.com
    January 12, 2012




    When Congressman Ron Paul embarked on a third Presidential campaign he did so with one over riding aim – to engage the next generation of Americans and provide them with the platform to restore the principles of the Constitution. The facts show that he has overwhelmingly succeeded.

    Tuesday’s primary in New Hampshire saw the Congressman net almost half of all votes from people aged between 18 and 29 years old. Paul received 47 percent of young voter support, data collated by the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement shows.



    “Dr. Paul’s 47 percent support from 18- to 29-year-olds was the strongest level of support for any candidate by any age group.” said CIRCLE Director Peter Levine in a press release.

    Ron Paul stormed the primary among young voters by a margin of 22 percentage points, more than doubling his youth votes since the 2008 New Hampshire primary. In comparison, Mitt Romney drew around the same number of young voters as he did four years ago, roughly 25 percent. This highlights how Ron Paul’s policies and principles have resonated with the future of the nation.



    The number of young voters who turned out for Paul in New Hampshire was close to 14,000. By comparison, the number of young voters who voted for Barack Obama in the 2008 primary was around 26,000. Even the most hardened critics were forced to admit that those figures alone are impressive. Data on young voter participation among Democrats in Tuesday’s primary wasn’t available, but Paul’s numbers will surely be even closer to Obama’s when disillusioned Democrats are factored in.

    The results in New Hampshire dovetail with those out of Iowa, where Paul earned the support of 48 percent of the 18,000 Iowans under the age of 30 who participated in the GOP Caucuses. Rick Santorum came in second with 23 percent, while Romney gathered just 13 percent support.



    The statistics show that a very substantial 8,800 young people caucused for Ron Paul in Iowa. That means that young voters supported Ron Paul in a far greater percentage than any other age group supported any candidate in the State. Indeed, people under 30 provided Ron Paul with one third of his total votes.
    The Congressman constantly praises his young supporters and points out that they are so enamored with his campaign because “freedom is popular” and “That’s where the enthusiasm is”.

    Even more statistics released this week highlight the fact that Paul’s ideas have set alight the youth of the nation.

    A detailed survey of all U.S. Facebook users provided to POLITICO by Facebook, shows that Paul absolutely dominates the volume of posts, status updates, links shared to friends’ walls and user comments on the world’s most popular social network site.



    In the run up to the Iowa caucuses, Paul reached around one quarter MILLION mentions on Facebook, according to the data. The Congressman is routinely by far the most discussed candidate, making him the outright winner of the so called “Facebook primary”.
    In addition, an analysis of Twitter traffic by number crunchers Crimson Hexagon shows that Paul dominated the discussion on twitter in the week of the New Hampshire vote.

    Paul was mentioned by 26 percent of tweets from Jan. 6-11, while Romney was mentioned 22 percent of the time. Paul also was mentioned more often on Twitter on the day after the primary, with 27 percent to 26 percent for Romney, while Gingrich and Santorum were each mentioned 15 percent of the time.


    Earlier this month, three other separate studies also revealed that Ron Paul’s presidential campaign is surging across the social networks and the internet.

    Not only is Paul by far the most viral GOP candidate on Facebook and Twitter, he has the largest network reach of all the candidates, and is the most interacted with and trusted by users of all the other major social networks online.

    In comments to TIME for a piece on Paul’s youth appeal, Paul’s campaign manager, Jesse Benton, recently noted that young people have an “amazing BS meter,” and they often say they see Paul as more sincere, more reliable than the other candidates. “They haven’t had time to become cynical yet,” Benton added.

    Ideas are bullet proof and the Ron Paul Revolution is growing exponentially. In this very real sense, Paul has already won the decisive victory he recognizes is infinitely more meaningful than the office of the presidency.

    ——————————————————————

    Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.


    Similar/Related Articles

    1. Paul: Young People, Independents, Moderates Key To Campaign Success
    2. Ron Paul Takes New Hampshire Young Republicans Straw Poll With 45% of Vote
    3. Ron Paul Campaign Speech in New Hampshire (Leap for Liberty Event)
    4. June 5th Ron Paul Money Bomb – The Revolution vs RomneyCare
    5. New Polls Place Ron Paul A Strong Second In New Hampshire
    6. Following Iowa Surge, Ron Paul Polls Second In New Hampshire
    7. Paul rises in New Hampshsire poll
    8. Paul Urges Supporters To Donate In Immediate ‘South Carolina Money Bomb’
    9. Ron Paul To Everyone But Mitt: Drop Out
    10. Ron Paul Campaign Goes Viral
    11. Ron Paul Says It’s Two-Man Race After New Hampshire Finish
    12. Ron Paul Takes Second Place in New Hampshire
    » Ron Paul Has Won: Young People Engage With Liberty, Limited Government, Sound Money, Anti-War Principles Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  10. #850
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Ron Paul Closes In On Top Three In South Carolina

    Exposure of Romney’s big government tendencies precipitates slide in poll numbers

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Infowars.com
    Thursday, January 12, 2012




    After being largely discounted out of a top three finish in South Carolina, Ron Paul is now closing fast on third placed Rick Santorum, as a new poll out of the state shows Mitt Romney’s lead slipping.

    Unlike New Hampshire, where Paul finished second after taking advantage of strong support from Independents, South Carolina is dominated by social conservatives who would be more inclined to vote for someone like Santorum (although Mitt Romney’s frontrunner status defies rational explanation given his true stance on abortion).

    That’s what makes Paul’s rise to just one per cent behind Santorum in a new Insider Advantage poll all the more impressive.

    The poll illustrates how Mitt Romney’s once commanding lead is dissolving. Polling at 37 per cent just a week ago, Romney now stands at 23 per cent, with Gingrich in second at 21 per cent and Santorum third with 14 per cent. Ron Paul is in fourth with 13 per cent.

    “In the three other major South Carolina polls completed in the new year, Romney was earning 37 percent, 27 percent, and 30 percent, according to Real Clear Politics – meaning his 23 percent in the latest poll marks a precipitous decline,” reports the Hill.

    Attacks on Romney’s political background illustrating how he is plainly not a conservative by Newt Gingrich are said to be behind the former Massachusetts governor’s slide, which is ironic given the fact that Gingrich himself is just as liberal, supporting Nancy Pelosi’s cap and trade nightmare, socialist health care (he voiced support for Romneycare), as well as his vehement support for global governance.

    Perhaps Gingrich should consider joining forces with Romney, because their big government track records suggest a match made in heaven.
    With Gingrich’s numbers in free fall across the board, Ron Paul has a genuine chance of achieving a top tier finish in the Palmetto state next Saturday, especially if he keeps up his attack on Gingrich’s status as a “chickenhawk”.

    Meanwhile, in a national poll Ron Paul’s support has surged to 17 per cent, equal second with Newt Gingrich out of all the Republican candidates, disproving again the media’s hoax that he has no chance of winning the nomination.

    *********************

    Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.

    Similar/Related Articles

    1. Paul Urges Supporters To Donate In Immediate ‘South Carolina Money Bomb’
    2. Rep. Ron Paul wins South Carolina straw poll
    3. Ron Paul Takes Second Place in New Hampshire
    4. New Poll: Ron Paul Retains Strong Second Place In New Hampshire
    5. Romney Sinking, Ron Paul Surging In New Hampshire
    6. Last Poll Before Iowa: Romney & Paul Neck And Neck
    7. Another Poll Shows Paul Leading in Iowa
    8. Nationwide Poll: Ron Paul Surges Into Second
    9. Shock Poll: Ron Paul Tied for First in Iowa
    10. Poll: Paul Tied With Obama, Most Electable Of GOP Candidates
    11. CNN Poll Fundamentally Flawed: Romney Is Not Leading Paul In Iowa
    12. Paul rises in New Hampshsire poll

    » Ron Paul Closes In On Top Three In South Carolina Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •