The Paul File

[Ivan Seeking]

What about him is too radical? It is my position that this is MSM repetition at work, drilling into people's minds that he is too radical. If you sit down, listen to what he has to say, and seek to understand the relationship between government, freedom, and individual sovereignty, then nothing he says is "too radical." He is simply saying, let's stop falling for this Hegelian Dialectical bullshit. The aren't the problems in our world that the government says there are. People solve problems, not governments. Governments cause problems so they can expand their power, both for the elites in the private covert interest groups, and for the interest of those elites who have a lock on the reigns of big government.

First of all, I don't watch MSNBC. And I've been listening to Paul since 1984.

In my view, what he describes in many cases, as with his foreign policy, are more long term ideals, not action items for next week. We can't just destablize the world by changing our policies overnight. And he would eiiminate many protections that are, I believe, in line with the duty of the goverment to protect the general welfare. I support many of the programs that he wants to eliminate.

Ron Paul is like sex. It is great fun, and every generation thinks they invented it, but you can't base your entire life on it.

 

[The Esotericist]

I heard some speculation today he would ruin his kids career, hence his chance to be POTUS later, if dad betrays the party now.

Sen. Rand Paul Speaks on the Senate Floor on Defense Authorization Act - 11/29/11

His son doesn't care about his "career." His son is like him. His son cares about this nation. He was one of only three Senators that fought for the freedom of American citizens and for what this country used to stand for.

That's precisely the point. Integrity. Most politicians don't have it. They play politics with our future, with the nations future. I don't think Dr. Paul and his son play politics. We are playing for keeps now. If they lose? Blood might be running in the gutters, or people will be starving in the streets.

Careers? What do they matter to real patriots with integrity, patriotism, honesty, and loyalty to the constitution and the people?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Sen. Rand Paul Speaks on the Senate Floor on Defense Authorization Act - 11/29/11

His son doesn't care about his "career." His son is like him. His son cares about this nation. He was one of only three Senators that fought for the freedom of American citizens and for what this country used to stand for.

That's precisely the point. Integrity. Most politicians don't have it. They play politics with our future, with the nations future. I don't think Dr. Paul and his son play politics. We are playing for keeps now. If they lose? Blood might be running in the gutters, or people will be starving in the streets.

Careers? What do they matter to real patriots with integrity, patriotism, honesty, and loyalty to the constitution and the people?

I think his kid is a total nut. I won't even talk about him. I have nothing good to say.

 

[The Esotericist]

First of all, I don't watch MSNBC. And I've been listening to Paul since 1984.

In my view, what he describes in many cases, as with his foreign policy, are more long term ideals, not action items for next week. We can't just destablize the world by changing our policies overnight. And he would eiiminate many protections that are, I believe, in line with the duty of the goverment to protect the general welfare. I support many of the programs that he wants to eliminate.

Ron Paul is like sex. It is great fun, and every generation thinks they invented it, but you can't base your entire life on it.

Specifics please.

I can't have a discussion with platitudes, other than to say, you're wrong, and your analogy is a flawed one and wholly inappropriate.

What general welfare are you talking about? How do you think he would "destabilize the world?"

 

[The Esotericist]

I think his kid is a total nut. I won't even talk about him. I have nothing good to say.

Ahhh, by default I guess the discussion is mine. Those who refuse to present honest factual analysis have no room to criticize or speak out then.

 

[kx000]

Senator Paul would be the greatest president since Lincoln.

 

[joepistole]

Specifics please.

I can't have a discussion with platitudes, other than to say, you're wrong, and your analogy is a flawed one and wholly inappropriate.

What general welfare are you talking about? How do you think he would "destabilize the world?"

Where have you been for the last 45 pages? Obviously all the specifics against Paul either never registered in your mind or went in one ear and out the other. That is one of the amazing things about the conservative movement and its followers, including Paul devotees.

I think you should follow your own advice. Instead of platitudes, how about some evidence and reason. Virtually everything that Paul is advocating has been done before, and it didn't work.

With regard to Paul's foreign policy, ask China how well 600 plus years of isolationism worked for them. It didn't. With regard to Paul's economic policies, the industrial revolution wasn't all that great for the average Joe and Jane.

How about reading a little history?

 

[The Esotericist]

With regard to Paul's foreign policy, ask China how well 600 plus years of isolationism worked for them. It didn't. With regard to Paul's economic policies, the industrial revolution wasn't all that great for the average Joe and Jane.

How about reading a little history?

Yeah, how about you read your history?

The only culture on the planet that has survived as long as they have is because they have concerned themselves with their own affairs nincompoop.

China's culture and society is older than any other on the face of the planet, bar none.

The De-industrialization hasn't been so great for the country and those in the lower classes either hot shot.

 

[The Esotericist]

Where have you been for the last 45 pages? Obviously all the specifics against Paul either never registered in your mind or went in one ear and out the other. That is one of the amazing things about the conservative movement and its followers, including Paul devotees.

blah blah blah. Meaningless and irrelevant rhetoric. I could say the same about you. What specifics?

All anyone has shown is their woefully ignorant misunderstandings of libertarianism. Nothing specific to anything Dr. Paul has actually said. Personal innuendo or attacks by guilt by association perhaps. But no, nothing specifically critiquing a policy of Dr. Paul's showing comprehension and showing an true understanding for his policies.

 

[Michael]

Not only that but Paul isn't an Isolationist. He also has more MILITARY support than of ALL of the other candidates combined. Unlike the other arm chair war politicians and Chicken-Hawks, he actually fought when he was called to do so.

Lastly, China's doing well, I don't see their military bases all around the planet. So is Germany, and likewise.

 

[adoucette]

Not only that but Paul isn't an Isolationist. He also has more MILITARY support than of ALL of the other candidates combined.

What do you base this on?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Ahhh, by default I guess the discussion is mine. Those who refuse to present honest factual analysis have no room to criticize or speak out then.

The discussion is yours because I've heard enough from Rand Paul to be disgusted with him. His postion on repealing civil rights protections alone was enough for me. I guess your point is that I'm not allowed to have an opinion without arguing about it?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Once Paul supporters understand why he is unelectable, wisdom will have won another battle.

Bottom line: This is a non issue. He is unelectable and the election results will prove that once again.

 

[The Esotericist]

I think you should follow your own advice. Instead of platitudes, how about some evidence and reason. Virtually everything that Paul is advocating has been done before, and it didn't work.

Nothing he is advocating has been done. We have been under the yoke of a fascist controlled central banks for the past 100 years.

Corporatism has reigned for over 120 years.

Government seeks to do one thing, enlarge itself, not solve problems. People solve problems.

You're whole point is exactly the point. YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND HIM. HE WANTS NO GOVERNMENT. PAUL IS ADVOCATING NOTHING. HOW CAN NOTHING NOT WORK? THAT IS A DOUBLE NEGATIVE? :shrug:

Thanks Joe, as always, it is your own arguments that prove me right, if we elect him, he will succeed. He wants nothing. As you said, we tried it, it didn't work, it was nothing, and that nothing did work. That's a double negative, and that's just fine. Something works!!!! Nothing didn't work better, that is, this over-taxation, over-borrowing, over-legislation, over-regulation, nation building, policing the world. It just won't, can't, and has never worked. Ever.

The reverse, however, is true.

I've studied history. Did the Roman civilization work better when it was smaller and more manageable as a democracy, or as an Empire? Did it fall to an outside enemy, or did it crumble from within? Did the Soviet Empire get invaded, or did it collapse because of corruption and economic instability and unsustainable budgets and government spending? Government doesn't exist to solve problems, it exists to fund and feed the power of the ever expanding bureaucracy and security state.

 

[The Esotericist]

Senator Paul would be the greatest president since Lincoln.

Well. . . probably at least since Kennedy. My friends and I predicted when he ran last time that if his message ever really got out, and people really understood him and he gained traction, first the establishment would use vote rigging and fraud to keep him from power, and then they would use the tactics that they used on JFK and Ronald Reagan to manipulate his policy.

Assassination, and threats of assassination are very effective.

"As Weinberger recounts the same moments: "[Attorney General Bill French Smith] then reported that all FBI reports concurred with the information I had received; that the shooting was a completely isolated incident and that the assassin, John Hinckley, with a previous record in Nashville, seemed to be a 'Bremmer' type, a reference to the attempted assassin of George Wallace." [fn 16]

Those who were not watching carefully here may have missed the fact that just a few minutes after George Bush had walked into the room, he had presided over the sweeping under the rug of the decisive question regarding Hinckley and his actions: was Hinckley a part of a conspiracy, domestic or international? Not more than five hours after the attempt to kill Reagan, on the basis of the most fragmentary early reports, before Hinckley had been properly questioned, and before a full investigation had been carried out, a group of cabinet officers chaired by George Bush had ruled out a priori any conspiracy. Haig, whose memoirs talk most about the possibility of a conspiracy, does not seem to have objected to this incredible decision.

From that moment on, "no conspiracy" became the official doctrine of the US regime, for the moment a Bush regime, and the most massive efforts were undertaken to stifle any suggestion to the contrary. The iron curtain came down on the truth about Hinckley."

Bush Family Involvement in Reagan Assassination Attempt​

The Unsolved Mystery of the Bush/Hinckley Dinner Date​

Forgotten Coverage of the Reagan Assassination Attempt

 

[The Esotericist]

What do you base this on?

Oh hell, everyone knows he gets more donations and monetary support from the military than all other candidates combined, including the POTUS.

Military adventurism in support of the military industrial complex and the Zionists is a scam and means senseless deaths, crippling, PTSD, and destroyed lives among enlisted men, non-commissioned officers, and the rank and file. They know what is going on. The average patriot is there to support and defend the constitution and not the corporate, intellectual, and financial elites. They are the true patriots. I have several friends that have been across the waters and fought over there. They have all carried a gun and defended this nation like Paul, and they support him. What other candidate has actually defended this nation? :shrug:

Why the Military Supports Ron Paul




None. They would just rather sell it out to the International banking Cartel.

This is why Romney is, in the end, no different than Obama.

 

[The Esotericist]

Once Paul supporters understand why he is unelectable, wisdom will have won another battle.

Bottom line: This is a non issue. He is unelectable and the election results will prove that once again.

If he's unelectable, then elections don't matter. The only thing that will be left is for people to decide if they want to live quietly under oppression, if they are given enough toys, food, clothing and shelter, etc. And if they are not? Will they take to the streets in greater numbers?

I guess if those who vote and hold jobs still have houses, jobs, food, money, video games, American Idol, NFL, and distractions; I suppose their lack of true representation and freedom won't really matter to them. Living in an oligarchy/ neo-feudalist society won't matter then I suppose.

 

[adoucette]

Oh hell, everyone knows he gets more donations and monetary support from the military than all other candidates combined, including the POTUS.

Sorry, each and everyone of them was a Ron Paul campaign ad and none of them sourced the data.

What independent data do you have to back up your assertion.

By the way, money donated isn't that great of a metric because just a few LARGE contributors can make that meaningless as far as your claim goes.

 

[adoucette]

If he's unelectable, then elections don't matter.

He's unelectable because so few people will actually vote for him in an actual election.

He got 41,000 votes last election.

Hoorah.

 

[eyeswideshut]

He's unelectable because so few people will actually vote for him in an actual election.

Circular logic, or are you a clairvoyant now ?

He got 41,000 votes last election.

And this is relevant how ? You do realize that he was running as a third party candidate, which is a hopeless situation in this dem/rep paradigm.