it seems that history shows us that great men who defend life ,freedom and liberty the Constitution of the U.S.A. are short lived. one smelly way or another! does anyone else have any gut feelings that something fishy will go wrong? God Bless America home of the brave land of the free
2007-12-21 02:08:49 · 12 answers · asked by cool_hand_luke613 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No. The last President to speak out against the "men behind the curtain" ( the Federal Reserve) was JFK, I think you know what happened to him.
2007-12-21 02:13:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
If you believe that your personal rights and liberties are inalienable and not given or on loan to you by your government or society then you might want to consider supporting him. There is no greater champion of personal liberties than Dr Paul in congress today. However, with personal liberty you must also acknowledge personal responsibility. This is a hard pill to swallow for many people and is one of the main dividing factors between himself and social liberals who have some similar basic philosophies. While our Founding Fathers had their flaws, they were divine in their understanding of how power can corrupt and they knew the value of a decentralized government. Their principle philosophy is tied to the notion that the government borrows its power from the individual. Whereas, a individual grants his/her power to local government and then that local government grants its power to the state and then the state grants its power to the federal government. The smallest entity in this philosophy holds the greatest power and the larger the entity gets the less power it has. Our constitution was created to keep the federal government in check with regards to how much power it can acquire over the sovereign states and the sovereign individual. This is not the environment you see in this country today. Our checks and balances have been hijacked to bring all of the power to the federal government. This is what Dr Paul consistently opposes. This is why he always votes using the constitution as his measuring stick. He gets marginalized when he wants to abolish the Department of Education and people claim that he is against education. However, he is only pointing out that that should not be a function of the federal government but instead should be the states responsibility to govern education.
2016-05-25 07:20:41 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As Ron Paul gains momentum, the "Republicrats" will take action, just as they did against H. Ross Perot. They will first use legal challenges. If that doesn't work, they will resort to "dirty tricks" and mudslinging. If Paul continues to gain popularity, they will then use manipulation, intimidation or violence to keep him from winning the nomination.
"Republicrats" are very comfortable in their monopolistic, corrupt stranglehold they've maintained over the electoral process. No one will be nominated - or elected - that doesn't 'tow the line' and keep the 'status quo'.
If threats and violence don't work, "Republicrats" will have no compunction about arranging for Ron Paul's 'untimely' death due to a mysterious medical condition, a bizarre accident or an unsolved murder. -RKO- 12/21/07
2007-12-21 02:40:34 · answer #3 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think he's fairly safe from them. But what he's not safe from is the political attack machines from both parties and the media distortions. They both blur the facts and spin everything. Ron Paul never said "9/11 was an inside job." In fact, he plainly states that it's a preposterous position and that he does not believe there was any US government conspiracy involved. He DID say, correctly, that widespread ineptness is what allowed 9/11 to happen in the first place. And everyone criticizes his foreign policy. What they fail to realize is that he would take measures to protect us much better at our borders and from within.
2007-12-21 02:23:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ron Paul is much ado about nothing. The man has the chance of a snowball in hell of getting nominated let alone elected even without hanky panky at the polls so what is the big issue?
2007-12-21 02:31:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
well, Ron Paul is like 72, so whatever happens to him, he won't be "short lived". I think the polls are fixed though, the last thing the republican party wants is a genuine, honest, straight talker like Ron Paul.
2007-12-21 02:19:16 · answer #6 · answered by S007 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
No, they exert every ounce of pressure they can against him and others that do not accept theyre bribes.
2007-12-21 02:38:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
well if he tries to back our money with silver like jfk after the federal reserve abolished money being back with gold back in the 40's he'll be shot
2007-12-21 02:17:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Ron Paul is quite safe from winning any state in the primary and is safe from winning the primary.
Your outrageous, over-the-top rhetoric notwithstanding.
2007-12-21 02:18:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
Men behind the curtain? Do you mean like Wizard of Oz behind the curtain? If so, I think not.
2007-12-21 02:14:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋