I Am Jim Rogers And I Support Ron Paul

Zero Hedge ^ | 8/27/2011 | Tyler Durden

[PhilipFreneau]

Ron Paul has another illustrious supporter - Jim Rogers. The Quantum fund co-founder, who has been spot on about pretty much everything for the past 3 years. . . . . . "In this election if Ron Paul gets anywhere near the nomination I would certainly support him. He is the only one that I've seen in American politics that seems to have a clue about what's going on." Zero Hedge agrees on all counts.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>He made a strategic decision to transfer his wealth out of the USA that most of us will no longer be allowed to make.<<<

He also recommends we buy gold and silver as a hedge against inflation of our fiat currency.

[dila813]

the statement was around the GOP Nomination ... I can’t do anything about him running as an independent .... therefore I won’t worry.

Don’t worry about things you can prevent ... it just causes you unmitigated stress and health problems.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>...and make him Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces- the position in which he is weakest policy wise.<<<

Have you ever read his foreign policy? Here is the link:

http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/national-defense/

Paul also stated: “There’s nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today... we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours. And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we’re acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapons”

Sounds pretty reasonable to me: “Walk softly and carry a very big stick.” Where have I heard that before?

>>>Sounds like some people may be trying to get Paul away from any economic policy control regarding the Fed.<<<

With the bully pulpit, Paul can awaken America to the danger and corruption of the Fed. Obama certainly won’t do it because he is bed with them, just like Bush and Clinton.

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

You saw the word “forums” there, right? The comment was about Zero Hedge. Post 11 was to you. In it, you’ll find a great example of exactly what I’m talking about.

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

There’s nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today

You betcha.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>...and make him Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces- the position in which he is weakest policy wise<<<

Forgot to mention (it’s in the link on Foreign Policy) that Paul considers secure borders as a key part of national security. He also believes this:

“A nation without borders is no nation at all.”

Gotta like the man if you want border security. But if you like open borders, support Perry or one of the other RINO’s.

[PhilipFreneau]

Leave it some RINO to take his statement out of context. He was referring to other nations.

Paul is a strong supporter of the war on terror, but against nation building. That puts him in the same company as G.W. Bush (prior to 911) and the 2000 GOP platform. And let’s admit it, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been failures.

Reagan had the best idea with his attack on Libya. Get in, scare the hell outta them, and get out. Gadaffi became darn near an ally after that indicent.

[PhilipFreneau]

I Forgot to mention: Ron Paul wants to get rid of the politicians in the intelligence field and replace them with intelligence professionals. Recall that the attack on the WTC was may not have happened if politicians (Jaime Gorelick, comes to mind) had not tied the hands of the CIA and FBI.

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

Ron Paul talks out of both sides of his mouth on immigration. One one hand, he says you can't have a country without borders. On the other, he says the libertarian ideal is a nation with "blurred and open" national borders, like the borders between our states.

He also finds the idea of a border fence "offensive", opposes deporting illegals and says employers should be burdened with proving their employees are U.S. citizens.

The man is as duplicitous as any other career bureaucrat in Washington.

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

He said nobody could attack us. Somebody did.

And other nations do in fact sponsor, fund, train and support terrorist organizations. Including Ron’s good friends in Iran. When’s his next America-bashing interview with Mullah TV, anyway?

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>You saw the word “forums” there, right? The comment was about Zero Hedge. Post 11 was to you. In it, you’ll find a great example of exactly what I’m talking about.<<<

Now I get it. You were trashing both Zero Hedge and Jim Rodgers. Thanks for clearing that up.

[shield]

Jack Wheeler's take on Ron Paul, the wacko:

So I'm happy that Christie isn't running - and not that Ron Paul is. Once again, in the Ames, Iowa debate last night (8/11), he exposed himself as a Blame America Firster who has no desire whatever to defend our national security.

He's done this with complete consistency in Congress, never once voting for a single defense authorization bill. But last night, he went total wacko. Not only did he blame the US for Iran being a state sponsor of terrorism, not only did he excuse Iran's quest for nuclear weapons, he actually wants Iran to have nukes. It's "natural" for the mullahs to have nukes, and "what's so terribly bad about this?"

I've gotten a number of pro-Paul TTPers mad at me for saying this before, but this seals the deal that he has a Hate America foreign policy as bad as Noam Chomsky's. At least in Ames it's out on full undeniable display. And by defending Mullah nukes, it also shows he's a Hate Israel Anti-Semite. No wonder he was booed.

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

This is the dickhead that has already thrown in the towel against the chicoms by living in hongkong and having his children learn mandarin.I guess when you are that rich you can afford to be a paulista.I will take my chances with America.

[Magic Fingers]

“Paul, at least, has some sense about how to run a limited government.”

He is also very understanding of Iran’s desire to develop nuclear weapons. That’s a little too “limited” for me.

[John D]

So “Philip”, who’s your second choice?

If cut and run is his first obama must be his second. They have the most in common of anyone running.

[John D]

(I say statements because he never accomplishes anything of substance)

I an not sure wasting $100 million in earmarks is not of substance, but that is all he has ever accomplished. Spending our money while he says he is against wasteful spending. Again he says one thing and does another, but accomplishes nothing.

[John D]

). It would not surprise me at all if this character decides to run as an "independent." Think back to Ross Perot. Was that a problem or a worry???

Big difference. Perot was pro-America. Cut and run blames every problem in the world on America. Only a democrat would vote for the surrender monkey. He would hurt the king much more than any Republican.

[John D]

Paul also stated: “There’s nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today... we could defend this country with a few good submarines.

Cut and run said all we needed was 1 submarine. His idea of national defence is appease the enemy enough and they will leave us alone. It worked well for Nevile Chamberlain didn't it?

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Ron Paul talks out of both sides of his mouth on immigration. One one hand, he says you can’t have a country without borders. On the other, he says the libertarian ideal is a nation with “blurred and open” national borders, like the borders between our states. <<<

Then he must not be a libertarian. This is his position on enforcement:

2.Enforce visa rules.Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.”

I also like his other positions:

1.Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.

3.No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.

4.No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.

5.End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.

6.Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.

[John D]

.Enforce visa rules.Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.”

Like cut and run is EVER going to do anything. Can you name one thing that the surrender monkey has ever actually accomplished in the entire time he has been in Washington, other than collect as many earmarks as possible, but he SAYS he is against them.

I also like his other positions:
Physically secure our borders and coastlines.

The surrender monkey is for open boarders.