CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Ron Paul's announcement
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ron Paul's announcement

post #1 of 31
9/8/08 at 1:18am
Thread Starter 
I'm not a fan of Ron Paul's extreme views but I am an admirer of his pluck and willingness to freely speak truth to power. See one of those rare primetime moment here. Even though he has been completely ignored by the mainstream media since then he's still out there and evidently has an announcement coming Monday. Any guesses what it will be?

Quote:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Jesse Benton
September 5, 2008

ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA – On the heels of his historic three-day rally in Minneapolis that drew over 12,000 attendees, Congressman Ron Paul will make a major announcement next week in Washington at the National Press Club.

More details will be announced Monday.
Source.
Reply
post #2 of 31
9/8/08 at 1:21am
He is going to endorse Barr, maybe?
Reply
post #3 of 31
9/8/08 at 1:36am
He is gonna run as Indepedent and steal just enough votes from Obama so McCain wins, and it becomes a Shyamalan twist because he was in it for that all along?
Reply
post #4 of 31
9/8/08 at 1:38am
I'm pretty sure it's too late to get in there on the ballots.
Reply
post #5 of 31
9/8/08 at 1:39am
Thread Starter 
I don't think Ron Paul takes Obama's votes; I think he takes McCain's. But I don't think he's going to run as an Independent.

He said on Colbert that attending the RNC would be violating everything he believes.
Reply
post #6 of 31
9/8/08 at 1:39am
He would "steal"* votes from Obama, or McCain. Not even sure at this point.


* yeah, I'm not comfortable with the term "steal" here, but we know what it means.
Reply
post #7 of 31
9/8/08 at 1:40am
Yeah, I'm not sure. He would get anti-war votes, but also anti-government ones.
Reply
post #8 of 31
9/8/08 at 2:10am
Yeah, I was completely not serious. Like, at all.

Would he do something as insane as endorsing Obama? I'd say "or McCain for that matter", but that'd be some Lieberman-soul selling.
Reply
post #9 of 31
9/9/08 at 4:44pm
Thread Starter 
Vanity Fair did an interesting piece on Ron Paul's counter convention and some of the people there who are getting involved in local politics. It's a fascinating movement, and if good old checks and balances are working, I don't think it would be a bad thing to have some dissenting voices in Congress. One of my favorite senators is Bernie Sanders, the Independent from Vermont.

Anyway, read VF's story here.
Reply
post #10 of 31
9/9/08 at 5:01pm
I think he'd be more like a Perot than a Nader myself. Sure he'll take quite a few Obama votes but he'll take even more votes from McCain. I think he's going to announce his independent run for president.
Reply
post #11 of 31
9/9/08 at 5:14pm
Thread Starter 
He's quoted in the story as saying he's not going to run, but I'm still interested in what his announcement might be. The story speculates he might be endorsing Barr or some other independent candidate.
Reply
post #12 of 31
9/9/08 at 5:21pm
It might be about the 5+ million dollars he has leftover from his campaign.
Reply
post #13 of 31
9/9/08 at 6:14pm
Not sure if this is the Big Announcement, but sounds like he's just saying, Go Third Party, or Fourth, or Fifth.

Quote:
Paul, a Republican who abandoned his White House bid earlier this year, is gathering some of the candidates, independent Ralph Nader among them, on Wednesday to make his plea.

"The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two party system," Paul said in prepared remarks obtained by AP. "This can be accomplished by voting for one of the non-establishment, principled candidates."

He recommended Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party, former Georgia Republican Rep. Bob Barr of the Libertarian Party and former Georgia Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party. He invited them to his news conference Wednesday.
Reply
post #14 of 31
9/9/08 at 6:40pm
I understand his point but why in the fuck would anyone want to support Cynthia McKinney? She's bug nuts insane.
Reply
post #15 of 31
9/9/08 at 6:43pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken View Post
I understand his point but why in the fuck would anyone want to support Cynthia McKinney? She's bug nuts insane.
Bug nuts insane isn't precluding people from supporting the McCain/Palin ticket.
Reply
post #16 of 31
9/9/08 at 6:47pm
True, but the crazy coming out of McKinney's mouth can't be discounted.
Reply
post #17 of 31
9/9/08 at 7:30pm
Ron Paul also happens to be insane, it's just not as widely known.
Reply
post #18 of 31
9/9/08 at 7:37pm
No, it's pretty well known.
Reply
post #19 of 31
9/10/08 at 12:22am
Sorry but McKenny is literally crazy. Look at her demeanor in this interview towards the end of this video, as she was caught making a comment she didn't want aired.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IE6ufDzUTa4
Reply
post #20 of 31
9/10/08 at 5:43pm
Ron Paul and Ralph Nader on CNN right now.

Ralph Nader says it's an historic occasion becase Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, McKenny, and the candidate for the Constitutional Party have "agreed" on four things.

1. Pull troops out of Iraq. Stop being an imperial nation.
2. Undue the patriot act. Fisa, Torture.
3. Tackle the national debt.
4. Shut down the federal reserve.
Reply
post #21 of 31
9/10/08 at 5:52pm
Anyone...anyone!...who shares any kind of stage with Cynthia McKinney loses any and all credibility. Period.

Oh wait, it was Ron Paul? Ha, ok, explains that.
Reply
post #22 of 31
9/10/08 at 6:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt View Post
Bug nuts insane isn't precluding people from supporting the McCain/Palin ticket.
or Obama/Biden.
Reply
post #23 of 31
9/10/08 at 6:32pm
Okay, those three I can understand. But shut down the fed? Why?
Reply
post #24 of 31
9/10/08 at 6:44pm
If you're being serious, than I think I recall Nader saying "It's a government within a government, run by by private banks."

Google 'Federal Reserve Conspiracy' and you'll see why so many libertarians and independants loathe the very nature of it.
Reply
post #25 of 31
9/10/08 at 6:46pm
Well I'm not gonna get debate into monetary policy but it is a system esstentially owned by banks (That's public knowledge). Yeah and it is a government institution. But I fail to see how getting rid of it will make things better.
Reply
post #26 of 31
9/10/08 at 7:01pm
Quote:
But I fail to see how getting rid of it will make things better.
If you think something about the arrangement is immoral or unethical, then you'd want it gone whether or not you got a positive effect out of it. And that is one of the things about the lesser parties, they have stronger beliefs. (Though I'm not saying they don't think it would help to scrap the fed.)
Reply
post #27 of 31
9/30/08 at 3:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken View Post
Well I'm not gonna get debate into monetary policy but it is a system esstentially owned by banks (That's public knowledge). Yeah and it is a government institution. But I fail to see how getting rid of it will make things better.
The Fed caused the problem we face today with the loans. When they raised interest rates they way they did, if they didn't know this would be the end cause then people in charge have no business being in charge. If this is not reason enough to get rid of the Fed, then how about it is control by a cartel of very rich families, which no one is sure who they are. The fed banks are all private companies, they are not publicly traded, so there is no public disclosure on them.
Reply
post #28 of 31
9/30/08 at 3:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eenin View Post
If this is not reason enough to get rid of the Fed, then how about it is control by a cartel of very rich families, which no one is sure who they are.
They're probably Jews as well.
Reply
post #29 of 31
9/30/08 at 3:30pm
And we all know Woodrow Wilson loved to serve the interests of the rich.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trav
Not sure if this is the Big Announcement, but sounds like he's just saying, Go Third Party, or Fourth, or Fifth.
Unfortunately, because of the structure of American government, disparate voices that would normally form as smaller parties in coalition governments tend to either consolidate in one of the big parties (and thus lose much of their influence) or break off for the sake of ideological purity. Thus, crazies.

Ironically, factionalism has only gotten bigger and more deeply embedded into American government over time (sorry, Madison) so that anyone who disagrees has to vote for one of two monolithic parties (the same two since eighteen-fucking-sixty) or fade into obscurity. Plus, I don't like any of the 3rd party candidates this year, so there's that.
Reply
post #30 of 31
9/30/08 at 3:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cordo View Post
They're probably Jews as well.
I don't think the Rockefellers are Jewish, but the Rothschilds are. There are other families, but who really know who they are for sure. What does their religious or ethnic Affiliation has to do with them controlling very powerful banks? It not about race, but the very incredibly rich vs everyone else. It a class system, a hidden class system, these families own whole governments. This about public disclosure and accountability.
Reply
post #31 of 31
9/30/08 at 6:43pm
Hey all, don't mind me, Union rules state that I gotta put up this sign whenever Ron Paul's name comes up:



Thanks! Go about your business.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Ron Paul's announcement