Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
ron paul speaks the truth, this is fatal to the politician. DC is not a nice place. if you are going to point out the elephant in the living room be sure to bring an elephant gun.
Probably not. While I do not rule anything out, I do not vote in the Republican primary either and I also do not think Ron Paul can win a Republican primary.
So I really do not think I will ever be able vote for him. Although among Republicans that ran for president last year he is my favorite.
Probably not. While I do not rule anything out, I do not vote in the Republican primary either and I also do not think Ron Paul can win a Republican primary.
So I really do not think I will ever be able vote for him. Although among Republicans that ran for president last year he is my favorite.
He was the only one that was different from the others.
Probably not. While I do not rule anything out, I do not vote in the Republican primary either and I also do not think Ron Paul can win a Republican primary.
So I really do not think I will ever be able vote for him. Although among Republicans that ran for president last year he is my favorite.
By next election I think you might be saying something different. People are getting fed up with going on and will be looking for opposites.
I like Ron Paul a lot, but he is simply TOO OLD. He will be 77 in 2012 if my math is correct, and I do not believe he has a chance because of that fact alone. Do you really want an 80 year old president?
I like Ron Paul a lot, but he is simply TOO OLD. He will be 77 in 2012 if my math is correct, and I do not believe he has a chance because of that fact alone. Do you really want an 80 year old president?
Ron Paul's biggest mistake was being brutally honest. He began addressing dangers in the way the banking system was operating at congressional hearings as far back as 1999. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, a bill that ushered in the "creative financing" that helped bring down the housing market, passed with wide bi-partisan support. Ron Paul had one of the few dissenting votes. The following statements were made from the floor addressing concerns over dangerous potential implications of this bill:
"Such a scenario would put added pressure on the financial bubble. The growth in money and credit has outpaced both savings and economic growth. These inflationary pressures have been concentrated in asset prices, not consumer price inflation--keeping monetary policy too easy. This increase in asset prices has fueled domestic borrowing and spending.
Government policy and the increase in securitization are largely responsible for this bubble. In addition to loose monetary policies by the Federal Reserve, government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have contributed to the problem. The fourfold increases in their balance sheets from 1997 to 1998 boosted new home borrowings to more than $1.5 trillion in 1998, two-thirds of which were refinances which put an extra $15,000 in the pockets of consumers on average--and reduce risk for individual institutions while increasing risk for the system as a whole.
"The rapidity and severity of changes in economic conditions can affect prospects for individual institutions more greatly than that of the overall economy. The Long Term Capital Management hedge fund is a prime example. New companies start and others fail every day. What is troubling with the hedge fund bailout was the governmental response and the increase in moral hazard.
This increased indication of the government's eagerness to bail out highly-leveraged, risky and largely unregulated financial institutions bodes ill for the post S. 900 future as far as limiting taxpayer liability is concerned. LTCM isn't even registered in the United States but the Cayman Islands!"
CR: CONFERENCE REPORT ON S. 900, GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT (http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec99/cr110899-glb.htm - broken link)
Ron Paul's honesty has been spot-on. Unfortunately it often seems abnormal in the light of the company he keeps. His message is often depressing to listen to and thus the root of the problems with his ability to gain a wider support base. He is on the opposite end of the charismatic spectrum to our current leader, President Obama.
The majority of Americans vote for the candidate that inspires hope in improving their lives. Unfortunately, a well-written speech that makes empty, but plausible promises, motivates many voters to treat voting for their leaders much like voting for a big lotto jackpot, lay down your bet (vote) and hope for the best. Few would put their money on Ron Paul who is telling the better not to buy that ticket because you have a better chance of getting struck by lightening twice in broad daylight than you do winning the jackpot. Meanwhile, the other candidate already has created the illusion of the voter living in their new mansion enjoying their winnings.
Pathetic that the man that was right in the first place didn't win. But a man that hasn't been right about anything yet did.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
