FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
10 Questions for Ron Paul
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 3:55 pm    Post subject: Questions for RP Reply with quote

Questions for RP Smile

How would you characterize your past and current relationship with "Christian" Reconstructionists like Gary North and Rev. Rushdoony, (who advocate an American Theocracy complete with public stonings)?

How would you square your past and current relationship with the John Birch Society, with their fearmongering and paranoia and blame, with their assistance to the govt in harassing, denouncing, and blacklisting Liberal and Left-oriented Americans, and the documented use of Western Goals, Inc. (a JBS subsidiary) for reporting on Americans to national intelligence agencies? Is real JBS history a model for the kind of patriotic America you would like to see developed?

How do you square your admiration for Hayek with his support for Pinochet? Pinochet could not have been considered a "pro-Liberty" type of leader, could he have? If so, please elaborate. (Von Hayek acknowledged that Pinochet was a dictator, but believed that dictatorship was acceptable -- at least "temporarily" -- so long as he did nothing to interrupt the free market and US-based multinationals, except the forcible elimination of dissidents.)

What are your thoughts on Ronald Reagan's support for Latin American death squad leaders, like General Mont who said every good Christian should carry a machine gun along with their Bible, and practiced that policy on fellow citizens he did not like? Did these guys just get "a bum rap", as Reagan said?

At least some, if not the majority, of Austrian economists believe in privatizing Police, Courts, and even Legislature. As corrupt as the govt has become, do you agree that The Market can handle dispensing Justice just as fairly as a representative form of government? Would you support abolishing even the pretense of neutrality, in favor of market-based "for profit" Justice?

If, as even former Reaganite Paul Craig Roberts observes, America is being destroyed from within by outsourcing labor (which he calls virtual illegal immigration), and as economist Michael Hudson points out, corporations get off easy by offshoring their profits to tax-free havens, generating losses on the books for the IRS, while at the same time showing high profits for investors, will you consider using constitutional powers of the Executive (or the bully pulpit) to help Congress reign in these pirates?

Global free trade is one question. How about the deeper reality of Global Corporatism replacing representative democratic institutions? Do you consider the global collective of Corporations to be analogous with representative democratic governance, except in the most narrow sense of "consumer choice" that usually exists outside of natural or artificial monopoly scenarios?

Corporate Personhood emerged from Judicial Activism, which hijacked the 14th Amendment that guaranteed civil rights protections for all "Persons". It's a complicated story, of course. The Constitution talks about "commerce" between citizens and their companies, not "The Market". Do you consider laws that treat every Corporation as "a person", and thus having government provide commensurate legal and economic protections, to be congruent with a constitutional paradigm. Would our Founders have approved of this situation? Do believe in limiting or regulating "corporate persons", holding their "owners" more accountable to the Public good, or allowing "the bottom line" as the only determinant of American society?

An Alex Jonesian question:
What are your thoughts about The Illuminati? Is there any evidence that this Satanic Illuminati exists or is it simply a euphemism for collectivism and Global Corporatism? If the Illuminati DOES exist, will you place them on a terrorist watchlist along with Al-CIA-duh?

Quote:
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=22618#22618
As for the bubble economy, (earned) pensions and Social Security will go first. The US can't afford to bail them out and still plan the giveaways to the wealthiest 10 percent of the population who are the net creditors to the bottom 90 percent. Pension obligations were expected to absorb only 5 or 10 percent of production costs, but now they are absorbing nearly all the reported profits, and threaten to eat into the money available to repay the banks and bondholders. The big investors want to be paid, and this means taking money that was earmarked for employees.

The only question is whether the US government will bail out the individual wealthy investors. The working motto in such cases is that big fish always eat little fish.

The states and the municipalities will go next. They are among the little fish. Bush's tax cuts have slashed their tax receipts. Cutting taxes for New York City and most other localities is causing layoffs and widening unemployment, just the opposite from what Bush's economists claim to be the case. Today's mode of supply side economics will lead to shrinking markets, shrinking employment and intensify the financial squeeze on California and other states, as well as cities throughout the country.


All this seems to be the result of repealing the Glass-Stegal Act. It was forecast to occur just in the way it has, but the political campaign contributions by the large financial institutions won the day, backed up by the Junk Economics being turned out by the Chicago Boys.


Reformers are up against Chicago School economists who have been endorsed because their anti-government theories are so self-serving to economic groups that don't want to be regulated at all. The important thing is that "free enterprise" has only been able to be imposed at gunpoint. In fact, as Milton Friedman himself observed, only a socialist government can impose his kind of economics, without sunk costs, with "pure" markets. To work properly, everyone who doesn't believe in free enterprise has to be isolated, which means in practice that free enterprise only works in a police state.

Take the case of Arnold Harberger, the University of Chicago professor who was brought down to Chile right after the military junta overthrew its elected president. The first thing that the Chicago Boys did upon overthrowing the government was to close every economics department in the country, except for the Catholic University where the Chicago Boys had a stranglehold of true believers. Chicago School's monetarists are intolerant and censorial.

In the late 1980s, a decade later when Harvard brought Harberger over with the thought of installing him as head of the HIID (Harvard Institute for International Development), the Harvard students rioted (I wish I had a video of that), accusing Harberger (who is married to a Chilean) of sitting in his hotel room with a list of academic economists opposing the Chicago Boys and their free enterprise evangelism fingering the ones who should be murdered. Harberger denied that he ever fingered anyone to get killed, but what is known is that there followed a wave of arrests, killings and disappearances. The Chicago Boys held up Pinochet's Chile as a model - one to be emulated, not shunned. Yet their first wave of privatizations collapsed in a wave of corruption, and their privatization of social security became a new way of exploiting labor, via forced savings that were channeled into the stock market. Insiders gained and the middle class, which had been stronger in Chile than in any other Latin American country, lost out.

The moral is that free enterprise economics only works when you have authoritarian control to suppress opposition seeking to place economic relations in a broader social context.

The point I want to make is that the economists who call themselves free enterprise actually are defenders of the financial industry and the sacrifice of economies to pay their debts, regardless of how wastefully these have been entered into. Their idea of the market means that the "market" should adjust itself to debt claims growing exponentially, in excess of the economy's ability to pay. The consequence is a transfer of property. This is how privatization should be seen. To the Chicago Boys, it is all part of the adjustment process.


Does Ron Paul understand what he's supporting? If he doesn't, he's as historically autistic as Bush. If he does ...
Back to top
madthumbs



Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 81

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ask what he'd do about the vote fraud issue especially if he loses. Will he roll over like that guy spreading global warming nonsense now? Will Diebold be exposed?

If he's not racist, have him show us something more than just some publicity statements because we have white supremacists around him, and his public support of white nationalists.

Mention how religion has been used throughout history and ask how Christianity is now being used.

Does he really think he has a chance, or is he using the campaign and publicity to raise awareness?

_________________
opposingdigits.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Madthumbs,
I don't want to be critical for the sake of being critical, but they ask every dark horse candidate if they have "a chance". Kucinich answered: "If people vote for me, I do." But practically, the BIG MONEY and MEDIA will be behind the chosen picks, and only Internet people who know how to find shit will find him. There's plenty of people off the Web who vote, and plenty on the Web who couldn't find a URL if they tried. They go to mainstream browsers, the equiv of TV channels. This sorely limits chances of 'the buzz' propagating.

By the way, I was on YouTube last nite, defending Ron Paul against certain slander, that he was "associated" with conspiracy theorists and 9-11 "deniers".

I think the 'CT' thing and the 'racist' thing are spitballs. I think he made some racially-loaded observations, which are possibly inappropriate, but not overtly racist. It was not the 'race-baiting' shit like ads about Willie Horton by Bush and "Welfare Mothers who drive Cadillacs" by Reagan.

I don't know about the vote fraud. He should be bringing that up NOW, explaining it, not after votes are collected. NO, Ron, the "free market" in vote tabulation does not work better than having "the government" count votes with antagonistic oversight.

I raised the Christianity issue. He has already stated that he thinks the Separation of Church and State is wrong. I'm even more worried about separating the whacko Dominionists and Reconstructionists and "Let's Bring On Armageddon On Purpose" freaks from the State. They hide out under the banner of "Christian".

Other than those observations, please proceed joyfully.
Back to top
navari
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dilbert_g wrote:
I don't know about the vote fraud. He should be bringing that up NOW, explaining it, not after votes are collected. NO, Ron, the "free market" in vote tabulation does not work better than having "the government" count votes with antagonistic oversight.


Gary, this is an area that I happen to know a bit about....and while I can't
argue with you I'm not sure I can support your inference either. Vote fraud
has been alive and well for quite some time, irrespective of gov't or
corporate control. The stuff has been going on for a very long time, and the
real thing that has changed is the mechanisms by which it is accomplished.

P.S. Good to see your other comments. The attack dogs are out on Paul, and
we are going to see all sorts of accusations come out of the woodwork.
Back to top
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Navari,
Unfortunate to say but this is a relatively OLD accusation -- not from neo-cons -- against Ron Paul's friends at Mises and Council for National Policy:

Quote:
Jon Basil Utley- CNP 1984, 1988, 1996, 1998; Chairman, Americans Against World Empire, McLean, VA; Robert A. Taft Fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and works with the Atlas Foundation project to support and offer training for free market think tanks in Russia; associate editor, The Times of the Americas; columnist, The Washington Times, the Washington Inquirer; contributing editor, Conservative Digest; lecturer, Freedoms Foundation, Accuracy in Media; was a foreign correspondent and lived for 15 years in 3rd world nations and for 14 years was a commentator for the Voice of America (CIA); served as a director or advisory board member of many conservative organizations including Accuracy in Media, Council for Inter-American Security [CIS], and the Conservative Caucus, Ethics and Public Policy Center 42, The Reason Foundation, Solidarity America.

Americans Against World Empire 44 "Our principal Board Members and many on our Advisory Council represent a continuation of the Committee to Avert a Mideast Holocaust, founded in l990 at the time of the First Gulf War by the late Phil Nicolaides (see below), by author and columnist Joseph Sobran, and by long time conservative activist Jon Basil Utley. Board members include, Joseph Sobran, webpage, 45 Llewellyn Rockwell, Jr., President of the distinguished LUDWIG VON MISES INSTITUTE, Jon Basil Utley, studied history under the famous Professor Carroll Quigley at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service,

The Advisory Board includes, Doug Bandow; Burton Blumert, founder and President of the Center for Libertarian Studies, CNP's Otto Scott and Peter Gemma; Eric Brodin, President of the Foundation for International Studies; Ronald N. Neff and others

Mises Institute, is a CNP/reconstructionist connected libertarian institute which esteems notables such as Friedrich von Hayek. Friedrich von Hayek, protégé and colleague of founder Ludwig von Mises, is one of the founders of the Mont Pelerin Society of which many CNP are members. The Mont Pelerin Society is a relic of the fascist movements of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s, whose own members, such as Professor Milton Friedman, have "emphasized" that its policies are those of Adolf Hitler. [meaning from Hitler's policies in the 1920's and 1930's]. Soon after it was founded in 1947, the Mont Pelerin Society moved to London... Beginning in the mid-1970s, with lavish corporate financing, the Mont Pelerin Society, spawned a series of "think tanks". Von Hayek, the founder, wrote The Road to Serfdom in London in 1944, while teaching at the British Fabian Society's London School of Economics.

"...in London Friedrich Hayek was creating an organization that would later re-form as the Mont Pelerin Society. The early group was formed in 1939 and was known as the Society for the Renovation of Liberalism. Members of the organization included Frank Knight and Henry Simons of the University of Chicago, the slavishly pro-British American Fabian Socialist Walter Lippman, the philosopher Sir Karl Popper, Sir John Clapham of the Bank of England, and of course, Ludwig von Mises. [a founding member and for at least 13 years]

All of these early members of Hayek's group then met at Mont Pelerin, Switzerland to form the influential, highly-secretive, and elitist Mont Pelerin Society in 1947...From the beginning the Mont Pelerin Society worked hand-in-hand with the Pan European Union..."


in unrelated irony, a woman friend just sent me an email link to a Health Freedom website, about the new FDA plans to make everyone sick by "harmonizing" on crappy food adulterated with high levels of toxins, reducing organic standards, and by restricting Vitamins.

http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php

Well, my only problem is that the director of the center cited in the video on that page is Major Albert Stubblebine, of Project MK Ultra, mind control, clairvoyance, torture, cults, etc. MK Ultra? Health freak? Wassup?

Besides the Marsboy videos, here's something about Alex Jones and Stubblebine, and some misdirection (by another weird anti-Jewish website, but at least points out some interesting things):

http://www.illuminati-news.com/091906a.htm
Quote:
Major General Albert Stubblebine III,
the former head of U.S. Army Intelligence,
INSCOM at Fort Meade,
was interviewed by Alex.
He was Colonel John Alexander's boss,
the Satanist who taught soldiers to 'stare at goats' at Fort Bragg.
Alexander is the retired head
of the Non-Lethal Weapons Program
at Los Alamos National Laboratory
and a friend of Al Gore.

Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and Cheney
all advocate Stubblebine psychological torture techniques,
practised at Guantanamo Bay.


He and Albert Stubblebine have links
to occultists, ufologists and scientologists,
through MJ12 and the CIA's MKultra mind control project.
including the Church of Satan

Stubblebine is also on the web stating that NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON, because he's an expert on measuring things via photos. It makes me think this is PROOF that the AA flight DID hit the Pgon.


Last edited by dilbert_g on Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:28 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

in counterpoint, here's Ron Paul himself on Capitalism:

Ron Paul on Capitalism:

Corruption and fraud in the accounting practices of many companies are coming to light. There are those who would have us believe this is an integral part of free-market capitalism. If we did have free-market capitalism, there would be no guarantees that some fraud wouldn't occur. When it did, it would then be dealt with by local law-enforcement authority and not by the politicians in Congress, who had their chance to "prevent" such problems but chose instead to politicize the issue, while using the opportunity to promote more Keynesian useless regulations.

Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism. A system of capitalism presumes sound money, not fiat money manipulated by a central bank. Capitalism cherishes voluntary contracts and interest rates that are determined by savings, not credit creation by a central bank. It's not capitalism when the system is plagued with incomprehensible rules regarding mergers, acquisitions, and stock sales, along with wage controls, price controls, protectionism, corporate subsidies, international management of trade, complex and punishing corporate taxes, privileged government contracts to the military – industrial complex, and a foreign policy controlled by corporate interests and overseas investments. Add to this centralized federal mismanagement of farming, education, medicine, insurance, banking and welfare. This is not capitalism!

(See, he wants DE-REGULATED banking and insurance, etc. Sounds like he wants to end centralized banking, and return to the Wild West days of anyone who wants can be a banker, with no oversight except caveat emptor.)

To condemn free-market capitalism because of anything going on today makes no sense. There is no evidence that capitalism exists today. We are deeply involved in an interventionist-planned economy that allows major benefits to accrue to the politically connected of both political spectrums. One may condemn the fraud and the current system, but it must be called by its proper names – Keynesian inflationism, interventionism, and corporatism.

What is not discussed is that the current crop of bankruptcies reveals that the blatant distortions and lies emanating from years of speculative orgy were predictable.


OK, so removing ALL regulations on corporations will make them honest, or at least most of the time.
Back to top
PatrickSMcNally



Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 846

PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dilbert_g wrote:
(See, he wants DE-REGULATED banking and insurance, etc. Sounds like he wants to end centralized banking, and return to the Wild West days of anyone who wants can be a banker, with no oversight except caveat emptor.)

OK, so removing ALL regulations on corporations will make them honest, or at least most of the time.


Paul draws heavily upon an idealized image from the time when North America was still being colonized and there was always more land which could be stolen from the "Indians." He seems totally detached from the fact that banking crises were worse then in an unregulated environment and only relieved themselves by steady territorial expansion to the west. It's like he's created a world of make-believe wherein the USA of the 19th century was a territorially fixed entity that didn't depend upon external expansion for economic growth but just remained stable within a settled region while the magic hand of the free market brought prosperity to all. That's totally divorced from the actual development of capitalist imperialism in North America.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
navari
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 10:17 pm    Post subject: Marlines Baseball Team Confiscate Ron Paul Sign Reply with quote

Marlines Baseball Team Confiscate Ron Paul Sign


http://www.ronpaulonline.com/index.php?option=com_seyret&task=videodirectlink&id=48

Back to top
navari
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Listen to this...
http://www.ronpaulonline.com/content/view/99/135/
Back to top
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8483

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Ron Paul Tops McCain in Cash on Hand

July 06, 2007 1:14 PM

ABC News' George Stephanopoulos Reports: Though often regarded as a longshot candidate for president, Republican Ron Paul tells ABC News that he has an impressive $2.4 million in cash on hand after raising an equal amount during the second quarter, putting him ahead of one-time Republican frontrunner John McCain, who reported this week he has only $2 million in the bank.

In an exclusive interview taped Friday and airing Sunday on "This Week," Paul said his campaign is on a better trajectory than McCain's.

"I think some of the candidates are on the down-slope, and we're on the up-slope," said Paul.

Paul's cash on hand puts him in third place in the Republican field in that important metric, although he is well behind leader Rudy Giuliani, who has $18 million in the bank, and Mitt Romney, with $12 million.

Paul, who polls show with support in the low single digits, said his surprisingly strong fundraising is the best measure of his support.

"I think people have underestimated the number of people in this country who are interested in a freedom message," says the Republican congressman from Texas, who has strong libertarian leanings.

To watch the full interview, tune in to "This Week" on Sunday

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/07/ron-paul-tops-m.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
puffdaddy



Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 506
Location: Northern California

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:11 am    Post subject: Ron Paul Tops McCain in Cash on Hand Reply with quote

I just don't think that a Republican has a chance to be elected as President in 2008. I wonder why Ron Paul is running as a republican? Surprised
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
navari
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ron Paul responds to a question about the War on Drugs.... (1min video)
http://www.ronpaulonline.com/index.php?option=com_seyret&task=videodirectlink&id=63
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 2 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.