So you think Ron Paul is crazy? (2002 video shows him making stunningly accurate predictions)

American Thinker ^ | 01/09/2012 | Jason McNew

[SeekAndFind]

Intellectually speaking, we live in fascinating, if dangerous, times. Given a larger view of history, it should be understood that nations, political systems, and currencies come and go on a fairly regular basis. Human freedom is an exception -- not the norm.

There are four core components necessary for the existence of an independent, sovereign nation: A system of laws (constitutional or otherwise,) geographical borders, a sound monetary system, and a defensive function.

Presently, the United States is failing (or trending toward failure) on the first three counts. Failure on two or more will lead to a failure of the fourth (national defense.) Capitalism notwithstanding, could it be that this is what Russia, China, and the emerging Islamic Caliphate want? Or what George Soros wants?

It is for this reason that I support Ron Paul for POTUS. Yes, detractors of Paul's foreign policy may have legitimate gripes -- in particular his seeming failure to understand that radical Islamists cannot be disincentivized in the same way that Soviet Communists could.

Here is a short, 2002 video of Ron Paul making a multitude of predictions in the areas of economics and geopolitics. Watch the entire thing before judging -- Paul's accuracy craves explanation.

http://youtu.be/zGDisyWkIBM ;

Could it be that Ron Paul is right about economics, the Constitution, and geopolitics, and that his detractors are the ones that have it wrong?

[ejonesie22]

I will be very clear and detailed so there is no misunderstanding.

I am saying, regardless of validity of anything else Paul may or may not support, if you support this whack job for President, a man who has no issues with a terrorist nation, a nation that has low earth orbiting capability I might add, gaining nuclear weapons capability, a man who supports traitors such as Manning, a man who has said it would have been better if Israel did not exists, a man who can't take responsibility for the racist writting in his own newsletters, etc. etc. etc. then you are no Conservative by FreeRepublic standards or any that I know of.

To put it succinctly, your boy has no problem with letting a bunch of nuts who want to kill my family, my child, have nuclear weapons. It has nothing to do with any party, but with sanity.

As far as the letter, understanding why those issues arose is one key to understanding why Paul is a nut.

Had any trips to the Soviet Union lately?

No?

Why is that...

[ejonesie22]

I hope not for long. I am hoping JRs silver hammer comes down upon the fools heads. They used to be entertaining but now are just stupid.

[monkeypants]

You are a funny guy.

I never said I was a Paul supporter, but in the current situation with multiple poor choices I encourage a healthy dialog and focus on specific issues and facts.

There are a lot of “if you’s” in your rant that are certainly presumptive. When you go off into “your boy who has no problem with a bunch of nuts killing my family..” it tells me that you would rather rant and scream than focus on issues and you may be challenged sticking to facts.

I personally don’t think the Republican party is serving us well regardless of whom you are supporting. That does not mean that I dislike all Republicans - I have rarely voted for other parties.

I proudly served this country and I’m a retired Naval Aviator - sorry, no trips to Russia or any current Communist countries (you probably missed the fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists). I happily carry a Glock 27 and have a CHP and I do support the Constitution as drafted.

What about you? What are your credentials as a self appointed judge? Who are you pushing and why? How are their positions different?

Thanks and have a nice day...

[hedgetrimmer]

removing us from the world community

You mean protecting our tax dollars from going to globalist institutions like the UN, the global banking cartels, foreign governments and such? You sound just like a global citizen.

So, you went and saw where I posted something positive about Perry

Wow, what an ego. I didn't see that at all. Perry condemned himself when he publicly stated after switching parties that he wasn't changing his ideology. He is the textbook definition of a RINO.

You wouldn't misrepresent something, would you?

I have stated Mr. Bush is a globalist, a fact, not a misrepresentation. He signed Agenda 21 at the Rio Accords, furthering his NWO agenda he alluded to in the address to the joint session of congress. And if you read the text of his address, you'll see he clearly states that the United States wasn't initiating the war in Iraq but "Clearly, no longer can a dictator count on East-West confrontation to stymie concerted United Nations action against aggression....A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective—a new world order—

A new partnership of nations? Concerted United Nations effort? The man was committing treason, partnering us heavily with the corrupt communist founded United Nations.

Absolutely NO misrepresentation. Its there in his own words.

Then quit helping Democrats, who are the marxists, support illegal immigrants, would give away our rights to the ICC. As far as global trade, it has "raised all boats", ours included.

There is no difference between the democrats and the Globalist Occupied Party at this point. If democrats are marxists, and they change party affiliation to republican then hello!!!! Guess what has happened to the GOP! Two republican presidents have given our rights away to any number of internationalist organizations, you make me laugh with your ludicrous comments!

As for illegal immigration we had THREE republican presidents enabling it because they were GLOBALISTS. Starting with Reagan's amnesty and the nice incentive program for illegal alien health tourism called EMTALA not coincidentally in the same year.

The globalist agenda for "free trade" was to reduce wages in this country, destabilize the population with a culture war brought in by foreign nationals and cultural marxism. So the so called republican presidents supported illegal immigration big time. So much corruption in the Bush Administration for "free trade" helped to put us in our dire circumstances now. "free trade" has only made the globalists more wealthy it is destroying the American citizen and the American way of life.

You do not state any views that are conservative, but sound like a 'good' global citizen to me. America means nothing to you.

[TV Dinners]

According to the OP the topic is “So you think Ron Paul is crazy? (2002 video shows him making stunningly accurate predictions)”

Name one Pol that hasn’t flat out lied...

[John D]

What name would you give the people who are working to destroy United States sovereignty and independence?

Most people call them paulbots.

[John D]

The fact is that he did serve and Newt did not - that was the point. Maybe he was not technically drafted, but the more important fact is that he served.

And the fact is Newt was NOT allowed to serve.
Cut and Run may have served, but could not even receive one promotion in the entire five years he was in the Air Force. What does that tell you about the surrender monkey?
I guess he was as effective in the Air Force as he is as a congressman.

[hedgetrimmer]

So all the presidents democrat and republican signing UN treaties for advancing global socialism, funding internationalist institutions like the WTO the world bank, allowing unchecked illegal immigration, and giving command of our troops to NATO are paulbots?

[Happy Rain]

rhetorical question

[Afronaut]

"I want to totally disassociate myself from the policies that have given us unprecedented deficits, massive monetary inflation, indiscriminate military spending, an irrational and unconstitutional foreign policy, zooming foreign aid, the exaltation of international banking, and the attack on our personal liberties and privacy"

So you are defending these points knowing how the movie ended? Think 2008...

[A.Hun]

I understand that you will never let go of your conspiracy theories, no matter what facts rear their heads.

GHWB’s speech was no blueprint for some Bilderberger plot as Pat Robertson thought. You can read the speech.

Perry is a conservative politician. He’s not perfect, but he is nothing of the caricature paulbots have painted of him. People, including politicians, change.

It was curious to me that you picked him out of all the politicians running....why didn’t you use Newt or Santorum instead? I believe I was correct in your motive for using Perry, even though I cannot prove it.

Only Paulbots and Birchers can’t tell the difference between the GOP and the Democratic Party. They are the same ones that have stated here that there is no difference between GWB and Obama.

That makes them, and you, irrational.

You don’t understand free trade at all, apparently. The fact of the matter is that manufacturing has not left the US. We manufacture more goods now than at anytime in our history (down a little from the recession). That is an undeniable fact.

Manufacturing in the US has changed, but for a lot of reasons. There are far fewer people hired for the same amount of goods manufactured, but that doesn’t mean manufacturing has disappeared. Your entire argument is moot when you recognize that fact (which I’m sure you won’t).

Besides that, every trade agreement we have entered into the last thirty years has increased imports and exports for all parties involved. (Another one of those pesky facts).

Illegal immigration is a problem this nation has had for a very long time. There is no easy solution, no one can snap their fingers and send 12 million illegals home. No one can wave a wand and close our borders. I know it kills you, but GWB did more to rein in illegal immigration than anyone since Eisenhower. What has Obama done besides give them de facto amnesty?

Corruption in the Bush Administration? Ohhhh....HALLIBURTON!

[Smokin' Joe]

If that crackpot believes that releasing dope into the streets, destroying tens of millions of additional lives, families, neighborhoods and harming US productivity “promotes the general welfare” he is NUTS!

He's nuts? It is as if no one seems to think that crap isn't already there! Are you going to run out and become a toothless methhead just because it is legalized/decriminalized?

Me neither.

But at least my door will be less likely to be kicked in by someone with the wrong address on a warrant, my dog may live longer, and the Cartels to the south of the US (spread throughout as well) won't be able to send truckloads of money home under the radar (when the DEA isn't laundering it for them).

Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, either--and the money involved rapidly corrupted parts of the enforcement agencies from bottom to top.

I don't use drugs, I hate them, they have, through the actions of others, cost me any chance to retire. I'll work until I can't or I die, whichever comes first--but the current setup isn't working, there is still a drug problem, and our Rights have been sacrificed on that altar wholesale for little good effect.

And the d@mned border still isn't secure! (Maybe someone's getting a cut?)

[Proud2BeRight]

Legalize that crap and demand, supply and usage will increase dramatically. Todays user debris will be joined by tens of millions who have always been afraid of the consequences of getting arrested and have not had dope easily available.

Crime will rise as user losers commit even more to feed their new addictions. Traffic and other deaths and injuries will increase from more dope screwing up more people.

Your door may not get kicked in from the law but it might be from drugged up human debris needing more money to pay for that crap.

[hedgetrimmer]

You are the ONLY person to talk about conspiracy theory. You clearly must believe in it to have brought to the conversation so many times.

Here is GW Bush addressing congress. He is asking for money to fight a war that he CLEARLY states is a United Nations effort.

Perry is a TEXTBOOK RINO that’s why I picked him.

Oh yes I do understand ‘free trade’. It is the most corrupt disingenuous system every devised by globalist crooks. It’s not ‘free’. The US taxpayer and the American citizen are paying for it.

Finally, GW Bush doing something about illegal immigration? That’s to laugh. Illegal immigration grew faster during his administration than it did in the previous two.

Oh and thanks for reminding me, GW Bush grew the government faster that democrat bill clinton did, setting up all these globalist supporting institutions with US taxpayer dollars.

The corruption of GW Bush administration was aimed clearly at the United States Constitution.You bring up Halliburton not me. You’re the conspiracy theorist for sure!

[monkeypants]

Newt was not allowed to serve???

That’s a new one - LOL! Where do you get this stuff from? I had not heard that line of argument anywhere until now. Can you provide some support for that statement?

I don’t know how many promotions Paul got. But, from what I have read, he came in as a Captain (as is common for medical corps and jag) and was already up two ranks (skipping 2nd Lt and Lt) - it would not be surprising for him to stay at that level after a couple of years of active duty and a few years of reserves.

In the Navy, medical, legal and supply are all staff functions, not Line functions (which means that they can’t command a vessel basically. It is usually a good 6-8 years before advancing to O-4 as a Line officer (varies from time to time of course and needs of the service). But, you would not know that, right? If you had served you would.

OTOH, how many patients did he see and how did that go? (seeing as that was his job, not commanding a tank, driving a boat, flying a U2). Do you have facts that he was a bad doctor and got bad fitness reports or are you just making crazy stuff up and conjecturing?

Is it wrong to just willingly serve and focus on doing a good job in your area of specialization until your commitment is up without ambitions of climbing the military career ladder?

Are all service members who did not stay in until retirement “ineffective”? (by the way, how many years did you serve and what rank did you achieve - are you willing to be judged by your own definition of success?)

Is he ineffective as a Congressman just because he keeps getting re-elected or is it because he votes his principles (which you disagree with apparently - like following the Constitution).

You know, I send quite a few like minded independent / conservative people to FR as a source of facts on the conservative side of the battle. The spittle-lipped, crazy eyed invective that has been erupting around here makes me re-think that.

Most of us are not Paul experts and have never really looked at him before now - we are just frustrated citizens trying to sort through factual positions and background of candidates without the liberal lies and spin.

The only reason we begin to look at him is because the field of candidates is not satisfying. If a sane and rational conservative just merely reads the entire positions page on the official Ron Paul website, there is nothing objectionable there from my perspective.

I’m not going to skip my own personal due diligence just because some goofball yells at me on FR. I’m also not intimidated with folks trying to shout me down - I’ve dealt with plenty of libs who live that way because they have nothing to fall back on fact wise.

This kind of insulting and ignorant rhetoric will just turn folks off. Why don’t you try to politely outline why you have such contempt for Paul (or anyone else) with links to facts like actual video of the candidate saying some of the looney things that are attributed to them (whomever they are). Otherwise, you just sound as foolish as the left. Surrender monkey? Point me to where he surrendered... “Cut and run” - that’s a new way to describe military service as a physician..

When you make a statement or claim that is provably false, or just exaggerated supposition (even if minor) then everything you say has to be questioned.

At this point I don’t have a candidate that I’m excited about. I would love to have a principled (but pragmatic) Reagan to rally behind, but so far I don’t see it...(in those whom are official candidates).

Try a different tack - tell me who you are for and why... Give some of the other folks a chance to play virtual whack-a-mole on your position..

There is a long path to the nomination - it’s going to go on for many months given the way it is structured. We could wind up in a brokered convention - who knows?

Venting is cathartic - I feel better now. Your post did not deserve this long a response, but I’d like my fellow FReepers to understand where I’m coming from.

Have a nice evening.

[monkeypants]

Yeah...!! What he said!!!

Legalize guns and concealed carry and demand for guns, supply and usage will increase dramatically! Crime will go through the roof! Just imagine the dregs having weapons...

Oh, never mind - LOL!

At least we would all have guns to stop the crazed druggies who just filled their prescriptions for coke at Walmart and are breaking in our door to get a beer. Er, well, most of us already do.

Night all - retiring from this fun thread...

[Proud2BeRight]

Guns don’t fry the brains of their owners.

[monkeypants]

Nope - I don’t leave home without mine. My point was that the left uses this same argument about guns and the facts are that crime goes down when gun ownership goes up.

I don’t like drugs or support their use, but alcohol can be just as damaging if abused (said while I enjoy a nice California Chardonnay...). I don’t think that decriminalizing (but still regulating) drugs would be catastrophic. I worry more about an increasing number of SWAT types who are looking for a purpose and make a mistake...

Why carry a gun? Because a policeman is too heavy.

[monkeypants]

Nope - I don’t leave home without mine. My point was that the left uses this same argument about guns and the facts are that crime goes down when gun ownership goes up.

I don’t like drugs or support their use, but alcohol can be just as damaging if abused (said while I enjoy a nice California Chardonnay...).

I don’t think that decriminalizing (but still regulating) drugs would be catastrophic. I worry more about an increasing number of unionized SWAT types who are looking for a purpose and make a mistake...

Why carry a gun? Because a policeman is too heavy.

[A.Hun]

He is asking for money to fight a war that he CLEARLY states is a United Nations effort.

Of course it was. THat doesn't mean it was some global conspiracy to rob us of our sovereignty. Dang. Are you now trying to say that NWO as you use it doesn't refer to a behind the scenes plot to do exactly that?

There are forces in the world that would love to see that, but it is far left libs that embrace them...not GHWB, GWB or 95% of other Republicans. The US has used treaties and coalitions since before there was a US.

Perry is a good, Christian, conservative man that is certainly no RINO. In fact, I find it hilarious that a Paulbot has the stones to call anyone a RINO.

THe US citizen's standard of living has risen because of free trade. We have access to more goods and food than at anytime in our history. Free trade has helped us become the most powerful economic engine in the history of the world. We are the world's largest mfg and the third largest exporter.

Illegal immigration grew faster during his administration than it did in the previous two.

Over half of all illegals were here before GWB took office. The influx was due to the housing boom in particular, not that GWB did anything to hamper immigration enforcement that was already in effect. As much as anything, for the first few years of his administration, I believe hunting down Al-Qaeda and jihadis in the US took precedence. Of course, the context of a Republican's actions doesn't mean anything to you.

GWB's government spending was about the same as Clinton's as a percentage of GDP. Go look it up. (Never mind, here's a chart)

You bring up Halliburton not me. You’re the conspiracy theorist for sure!

I brought up Halliburton because you are just as deluded as the average libtard with your corporatist, globalist "corruption". You can't show one instance of corruption because there was none.

Now, please go away. Most people aren't buying what you're selling anymore. Every single candidate we can possibly get elected reject your ideology. No matter how closely you hold RP's beliefs, they are not conservative in any sense, and only hand power to Democrats by splitting the Repub party.