+1 x 1000000
so refreshingly well put. well done!
Why does Rupert Murdoch not like Ron Paul?
- Thread starter MarketMasher
- Start date
+1 x 1000000
so refreshingly well put. well done!
I second this opinion.
My post obviously went over your head. Paul would not "go after" the Jewish influence in our society. He would destroy the very things they have built. Big difference. There are a lot of very naive people on here that just jump up and down at everything Ron Paul. I understand a large part of his following is the college age crowd and it shows here on ET. I knew the guy before anyone on here knew him as a congressman from TX. I'm saying there are some very powerful factions on both the right and the left that have a strong ethnic connection that will not allow Paul to have the light of day. Hence why the media is not promoting him, nor Wall Street, nor Washington.
I'm no starry-eyed college kid. Then again, I'm no grandpa, either...
Paul will indeed destroy Wallstreet and fractional reserve bankers. And yes, monied powers will resist. Sure, some of them are Jews. But lots are Christian, Muslim, and atheist, too! Lots of pigs at the trough. We don't care about their breeds. Eliminate the trough!
As for what's "impossible", you underestimate the power of the grassroots. Whether Ron Paul wins or loses in 2012, the sleeping giant has awoken. Americans are rediscovering their Constitutional heritage en masse and rising up against the Establishment. Good for them. I hope all the "old guard" who defended the status quo get flushed. Lady Liberty has been raped for a long time. Don't you think it's time somebody stood up in her defense? Or should we all just hold our limp dicks and watch, like so many from your generation did?
Quote from achilles28:
I'm no starry-eyed college kid. Then again, I'm no grandpa, either...
You inferred Ron Paul intends to break Jewish influence over Wallstreet, Media and Hollywood. That's ridiculous. You're conflating the views of fringe libertarian groups you read in the middle of the night with Ron Paul. Then cast aspersions on him, by guilt through association. Obviously, THAT WENT OVER YOUR HEAD
Paul will indeed destroy Wallstreet and fractional reserve bankers. And yes, monied powers will resist. Sure, some of them are Jews. But lots are Christian, Muslim, and atheist, too! Lots of pigs at the trough. We don't care about their breeds. Eliminate the trough!
As for what's "impossible", you underestimate the power of the grassroots. Whether Ron Paul wins or loses in 2012, the sleeping giant has awoken. Americans are rediscovering their Constitutional heritage en masse and rising up against the Establishment. Good for them. I hope all the "old guard" who defended the status quo get flushed. Lady Liberty has been raped for a long time. Don't you think it's time somebody stood up in her defense? Or should we all just hold our limp dicks and watch, like so many from your generation did?
Easy there. You have no idea which generation I am. And again, I never said Paul was going to go after any specific ethnic group. I'm simply saying that there is one particular ethnic group that happens to support Israel, the media, Wall Street and Hollywood that is not very hip to Paul's ideas. They will put up a fight and they will more then likely win.
Having said all that, I love having Paul in the race and in the debates. But rather then have Paul running for President, I rather see 100 Pauls run for Governor, mayor and Senate seats. The sleeping giant has not woken. Most Americans want socialism in some form. It frustrates me as much as it frustrates Paul. People talk a big game then in the privacy of the voting booth they vote for big government. I honestly don't know what it will take for this country to get off the government tit outside of a civil war which is possible in the future I suppose.
BTW, this country has been through this movement before in the 1960's. His name was Barry Goldwater. Yeah, that didn't go anywhere either.
I apologize for coming off too strong. You're right, you didn't say Paul would go after Jewish influence, per se. I read your post more carefully on page#2 and edited mine above to reflect that...
Most of your reservations are on the money. The debt ceiling capitulation proved mainstream America isn't ready to back-up their tough talk with action, if it means their bennies get axed. Then again, they keep flirting with Libertarian ideals and voting hardcore tea-partiers into DC. Either way, America's goose is cooked. You may not agree with it, but economically, spending can't last at these levels. It's not long before a masse exodus of the dollar is forced, and the market imposes hardcore austerity. An establishment hack in the Whitehouse will likely print than take the pain, exacerbating the crisis. Even still, I'm hopeful. No President gets elected on a landslide majority. Head-to-head, Paul is in a statistical dead-heat with Obama. The voters will get screwed one way or the other, and I think they're beginning to realize there's no easy way out from this economic morass. And the best solution, is the free market one. So I guess we'll find out. And I bet you are a grandpa
From all the stuff I have seen about him (probably not enough) Paul has been pretty consistent and backed up his words with his votes.
That he was "small gov't" minded before the Tea Party came in existence makes it odd - even suspicious - that they do not rally around him as their champion, since he has been fighting that fight the longest.
It makes me wonder what the T-P agenda really is then, and if it is more astro-turf than grass roots.
Still, that the MSM is censoring Paul's popularity is very obvious - and even more so the more they do it. That it is done concertedly is even more interesting.
The so-called news media has gone from "reporting" to "influencing" and "shaping" by their collective censoring of a legitimate candidate - repeating the phrase "unelectable" hoping it will be bought.
So now that so much money has been spent to own and operate these "news" organizations, they are now irrelevant, because they have no legitimacy other than with lemmings who might listen to them.
That he was "small gov't" minded before the Tea Party came in existence makes it odd - even suspicious - that they do not rally around him as their champion, since he has been fighting that fight the longest.
It makes me wonder what the T-P agenda really is then, and if it is more astro-turf than grass roots.
Still, that the MSM is censoring Paul's popularity is very obvious - and even more so the more they do it. That it is done concertedly is even more interesting.
The so-called news media has gone from "reporting" to "influencing" and "shaping" by their collective censoring of a legitimate candidate - repeating the phrase "unelectable" hoping it will be bought.
So now that so much money has been spent to own and operate these "news" organizations, they are now irrelevant, because they have no legitimacy other than with lemmings who might listen to them.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The tea party is a populist movement. There is no "agenda" and there is no "leadership". It's just a collective of people. That is what all populist movements are. There is no grand conspiracy here. Most them sadly actually like big government and they love their entitlements. They want your hands off their social security checks!
Well said
Sadly what you said pretty much sums up the story of American politics right now. While the Tea Party has atleast gotten us to the point where we are talking about cutting spending, many of them (particularly the older ones)just want to cut someone elses spending, and when polled they do not want to touch the big 3 which are our biggest problems in terms of the deficit.
Bottom line is we are still at a point where alot of people say they want to cut spending, as long as it doesnt do anything to military, social security, and medicare.
And that gets us precisely nowhere. Unfortunately we are probably going to have to see it get even worse before politicians will try to fix it, because it is not politically expedient for politicians to start diving into our three biggest budget problems, look what happened to Paul Ryan when he made an attempt at entitlement reform.
Bottom line is we are still at a point where alot of people say they want to cut spending, as long as it doesnt do anything to military, social security, and medicare.
And that gets us precisely nowhere. Unfortunately we are probably going to have to see it get even worse before politicians will try to fix it, because it is not politically expedient for politicians to start diving into our three biggest budget problems, look what happened to Paul Ryan when he made an attempt at entitlement reform.