Ron Paul

[D_Dietrich Dipper]

Any Ron Paul supporters on here?

I think he is one of the greatest politicians in united states history

If your not sure who Ron Paul is, I think it is very important to research him and what he's all about.

He ran in the 2008 election as a Republican but he's a Libertarian, Trying to save our civil libertys


,Mac

 

[Bbucko]

It's obvious that your life does not depend of any medications taken daily, as he'd abolish the FDA.

 

[D_Dietrich Dipper]

wrong, he doesn't want them having as much authority in what they decide to give us. He stands for "Health Freedom" which seems to mean the freedom to choose to take whatever you want to take whenever you want to take it for whatever reason. He would expand access and control costs by making individuals primarily responsible for paying their bills with backup in the way of tax deductions for unreimbursed expenses.

and thumbs up for the jesse ventura qoute

 

[dongalong]

I'm a fan of his! He's a very smart guy - it's a long time since you had a president like that!
The mainstream media are finally starting to listen him, because he has been warning the US people about what will happen for decades. He offers concrete solutions to the current financial crisis, unlike the establishment.

He is one of the only politicians that talks common sense.

 

[Bbucko]

wrong, he doesn't want them having as much authority in what they decide to give us. He stands for "Health Freedom" which seems to mean the freedom to choose to take whatever you want to take whenever you want to take it for whatever reason. He would expand access and control costs by making individuals primarily responsible for paying their bills with backup in the way of tax deductions for unreimbursed expenses.

and thumbs up for the jesse ventura qoute

The last time I had all my medicines quoted to me at retail from the pharmacist (over a dispute with an insurance company), the total was ~$5800 per month, not including the assorted vitamins and supplements I was purchasing retail. The bulk of the cost went to anti-retrovirals (HIV meds), though there were some heavy-duty pain meds in there too after an accident at work exposed an underlying arthritic condition (congenital) in my neck.

I have since returned to work, but making about 1/3 of the amount I made then, so no amount of tax deduction would allow me to take the medicine prescribed to me by my doctors. And without FDA oversight, there's no guarantee that my meds are what they claim. My health is practically all I have left.

As a side note, there are still a few torture apologists who haunt this forum, though they've been quiet lately :wink:

 

[B_Marius567]

The last time I had all my medicines quoted to me at retail from the pharmacist (over a dispute with an insurance company), the total was ~$5800 per month, not including the assorted vitamins and supplements I was purchasing retail. The bulk of the cost went to anti-retrovirals (HIV meds), though there were some heavy-duty pain meds in there too after an accident at work exposed an underlying arthritic condition (congenital) in my neck.

I have since returned to work, but making about 1/3 of the amount I made then, so no amount of tax deduction would allow me to take the medicine prescribed to me by my doctors. And without FDA oversight, there's no guarantee that my meds are what they claim. My health is practically all I have left.

As a side note, there are still a few torture apologists who haunt this forum, though they've been quiet lately :wink:

my younger brother needs $5.000 in pills a mouth just to stay alive

 

[D_Dietrich Dipper]

my younger brother needs $5.000 in pills a mouth just to stay alive

It's stuff like that, along with the 9/11 first responders bill. That makes me sick to be an American.

IMHO 9/11 was an inside job, and alot of innocent people died that day, and the fact that the government won't take care of the first responders to there sick game is just awful.

 

[D_Fiona_Farvel]

As someone who is politically independent and leans libertarian, I am a fan of Ron Paul and believe he adds an important element of conservative freethinking to our current political system. However, having read portions of his manifesto, I think, like many libertarians, his vision of the libertarian state is flawed and unworkable. Even going so far to call it unnavigable for too many, particularly those already on the margins.

Do I believe much of what he does, yes, but remain critical of his, to my mind, wacky, Rand side. Of which, I am sure through his anti-collectivist beliefs, he approves.

IMHO 9/11 was an inside job, and alot of innocent people died that day, and the fact that the government won't take care of the first responders to there sick game is just awful.

Probably a good topic for another thread, there are many in politics and etc. prior to early 2009ish. Here's one I recall offered a decent discussion: http://www.lpsg.org/112103-9-11-conspiracy-7-years.html, and I think there's another in this forum a few weeks back.

 

[D_Dietrich Dipper]

Yea, i recall reading into some of it. most of what I read was people saying there skeptical of the official story with I like to hear.

All of United States major events' have mass amounts of conspiracy behind them. And sometimes people just need to open there eyes.

 

[JTalbain]

He sounds to me like what I think of as a good "committee politician". What I mean by this is that I don't know if I'd want him in a position where he has a lot of unfettered control over what happens in the jurisdiction of his job, but I think he's good in his current position of the House of Representatives. There, ideas he has can influence policy and bring things that are not in either party's focus to everyone's attention, but the extent to which he can affect things on his own is ablated a bit. Honestly, I'd like to see him in the Senate instead, where he can exercise a little bit more influence.

I don't agree with a few of his ideas, but I like the way he harshly criticizes existing government regulation. He is a constant watchdog and speaks out against the government ever overstepping its bounds. He tends to vote conservatively, but does so in the purest sense. He personally opposes abortion, but he believes that most of that issue is best covered at the state level, so the federal government has no business regulating it. He runs as a Republican, but he voted both against the Iraq war and the Patriot Act, seeing both as the government using 9/11 as an excuse to curtail personal liberties. He also supports stem cell research and puts forth actual ideas to improve and streamline the medical system, a rarity for someone running on the Republican ticket (although he is called libertarian).

I like him being in a group politics setting like Congress, because it means there is someone outspoken who watchdogs important issues and values and is willing to play the devil's advocate. He often votes "no", sometimes being the only member of the House to do so, but he doesn't seem to do so in an obstructionist manner as we've become accustomed to seeing lately in the Senate. Finally, I think one of the things that says a lot about him is that he returns a portion of his position's office budget to the Treasury every year. Between that and his consistency on his values (notably "un-maverick" to turn a phrase), I really think he might be very resistant to bribery and corruption, which is unusual to say about a politician. I wish that the Senate Republicans (and not a few Democrats) would take a few notes from his book, perhaps not adopting his personal views, but in emulating the way he conducts himself as a public servant.

 

[B_Marius567]

It's stuff like that, along with the 9/11 first responders bill. That makes me sick to be an American.

IMHO 9/11 was an inside job, and alot of innocent people died that day, and the fact that the government won't take care of the first responders to there sick game is just awful.

I Think some aids group is paying for the pills.

I am shy around people and he was very out going and will do just about anything. but it was blood from the hospital.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

He ran in the 2008 election as a Republican but he's a Libertarian, Trying to save our civil libertys

That's an oxymoron.

If Paul cared about changing things, he wouldn't belong to the Republican Party in the first place.

 

[houtx48]

That's an oxymoron.

If Paul cared about changing things, he wouldn't belong to the Republican Party in the first place.

LOL No shit.

 

[FuzzyKen]

If one studies Mr. Paul carefully he is another politician who on the surface sounds good. Many years ago we had a similar case with H. Ross Perot.

The guy really sounded great, and on the surface he made sense. The problem is that the problems we face have a great deal more than surface and this is where both men fail.

I have studied Mr. Paul. I will run with an example that has already been given. There are many ways reform could take place with regards to drugs/medications which has been the example cited here. The problem is that the reform would require actual honest competition between the sourcing of the medications. Let's for a moment make the assumption that we had available worldwide fifteen sources for a drug such as Acyclovir. If all of these sources produced exactly the same drug, there could be incredible advantages on many layered levels for allowing purchase of that drug from the cheapest guaranteed quality source. Does it really matter if the drug was manufactured by Ciplo in India or Upjohn in New Jersey if the drug is the same quality?

The problem and the impractical is that you will never see this. The reason that you will never see this is that most of the FDA and those doing the regulation are former employees of U.S. based pharmaceutical giants. They serve in a regulatory capacity for a few years, and then they "retire" back to the industry from which they came at even higher salaries because "they" protected the price fixing and the corporations they served while in office in this country. More important than looking at Ron Paul is to look at where the various heads of various branches of the FDA came from before joining the FDA. Then look at the men and women that proceeded them and where they went after they left.

The FDA is one giant "drug scam" under the present structure. Many drugs out there even OTC drugs are out and out unsafe. One example: Twenty years ago, teenagers were given Accutane by the 55 gallon drum for acne. Now, those same teenagers have been dying in record numbers. Those that did not commit suicide from the depression it caused in a percentage, are now showing up with ulcerative colitis, Chron's and cancer of the lower digestive tract. This was guaranteed a "safe" drug and the FDA guaranteed that safety. Yes, acne can be a disfiguring condition. It is however not life threatening. There is currently an FDA approved drug out there which is used to treat plaque psoriasis. Plaque psoriasis is again a condition that may not be pleasant to look at, but it is not life threatening. One of the side effects of this drug is a greatly increased chance of contracting Non Hodgkins Lymphoma Cancer. Who are they protecting on this one? The FDA is not protecting the people, they are protecting corporate profits. Ten years from now we will be seeing "ambulance chasers" filing class action lawsuits against the maker of that drug. What they should be doing is filing class action lawsuits against the FDA who approved the drug knowing that this was a possible consequence. Common sense would dictate that when is a chance for non-Hodgkins lymphoma cancer an acceptable risk for a cosmetic disease condition? Get real guys! These morons on the FDA should be jailed for that one!

The FDA is not now nor within the past thirty years has it been an agency that assures the safety of any drug. What the FDA assures is that the Corporations who develop drugs make as much money as is possible AND they protect the Corporations until the last possible moment before throwing them to the wolves.

I can go into incredible detail about numerous places that the FDA failed to protect.
This has taken place with HIV drugs, medical devices such as heart valves that proved defective, and the saga goes on and on.

Ron Paul is nothing more than another "re-packaged" H. Ross Perot. He sounds really good and he sounds eminently practical until you realize that no matter what he does he will not have the actual power to do one single thing he talks about. He will not have the power because the highest office does not have the power to do it. In order to accomplish anything on the scale that he professes, you would have to replace not only the President, but the United States Congress and the United States Senate as well and you would have to do so all at the same time.

With Ron Paul in office, all you would see is more of the same. He would be the most "roadblocked" President in History.

The only thing we have now unless we can get major election reform and investigations in all governmental positions for "conflict of interest" is voting for the lesser of evils.

Please, will some political party come up with a candidate that I actually WANT to vote for.

 

[JTalbain]

That's an oxymoron.

If Paul cared about changing things, he wouldn't belong to the Republican Party in the first place.

I suppose one could say that if I cared about keeping young boys from getting molested, promote gay rights, and don't think all forms of abortion should be illegal that I shouldn't be Catholic. But I do and I am. Just because you and the group you belong to don't see eye to eye on everything doesn't mean you shouldn't belong to that group.

Honestly, I think Ron Paul has the traditional Republican values at heart more than most of the Republican Party at the moment. He's for small efficient government, not government that favors big business on all fronts. He's for unintrusive government, and for him that extends past the Second Amendment to other civil liberties. Looking at his stances compared to other politicians makes me wonder just how many of the Republicans in Congress have been bought and paid for.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

If Paul was a Dem, I would say the same thing.

I would hope everyone has at least realized this basic truth; any appreciable govt reform we get any time soon will NOT come from either party.

 

[houtx48]

I get the feeling that the Paul family is a herd of squirrels.

 

[D_Fiona_Farvel]

I suppose one could say that if I cared about keeping young boys from getting molested, promote gay rights, and don't think all forms of abortion should be illegal that I shouldn't be Catholic. But I do and I am. Just because you and the group you belong to don't see eye to eye on everything doesn't mean you shouldn't belong to that group.

Honestly, I think Ron Paul has the traditional Republican values at heart more than most of the Republican Party at the moment. He's for small efficient government, not government that favors big business on all fronts. He's for unintrusive government, and for him that extends past the Second Amendment to other civil liberties. Looking at his stances compared to other politicians makes me wonder just how many of the Republicans in Congress have been bought and paid for.

I agree.

Plus, I like that Paul has broken through the political malaise some of his supporters felt and energized them to think and speak about the political, social, and economic conditions of the United States.

 

[JulieInNaplesFL]

Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air.

I guess some of the above is why this country is in such sad shape, But I'm sure Obama will fix things, LOL I'm sure. LOL..........

 

[dashdeming]

And what would party would you say he should belong to if he cared? Keep in mind that he was a Libertarian and only had to choose a party so that he could get certain benefits such as fairness in the debate process and more. He has not wavered in his principles ever (since the 70's entry into politics) and he has been way ahead of both parties in insight regarding the failing of the US financial issues as well as many other areas. I have actually folllowed his movements over the years and I do not simply follow the party lines. He truly is worth your research and attention. He is not a "star" like Obama nor an idiot like Bush. He stands alone and always has. Do yourselves a favor and study about him.

That's an oxymoron.

If Paul cared about changing things, he wouldn't belong to the Republican Party in the first place.