O'Reiley vs. Ron Paul..... as expected.

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Blackjack, Sep 11, 2007.

  1. Blackjack

    Blackjack Monkey+++

    Here's a summary:

    B.O. - Here's a question framed in a way that you won't agree with.

    R.P. - That's not a valid question, you have to look at the whole picture.

    B.O. - Too bad, it's my show and I'll just talk over you and not accept anything else.

    Rinse, Repeat.

    Makes me ill.
  2. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder

    Typical O'Reily.

  3. DesertDawg

    DesertDawg Monkey+++

    I take it that you didn't like that interview? I recorded it, and watched it a couple of time. In my opinion, O'Reilly was actually very FAIR with most of his questions, but Paul either side-stepped or started whining when O'Reilly pointed out that he hadn't answered the questions.

    While Ron Paul has many fantastic ideas, I cannot go along with his Libertarian views of having open borders, shutting down the FBI, CIA, NSA and all other intel organizations, and he wants to shut down the IRS but doesn't have a viable plan for collecting revenues for even a "skeleton" crew of government entities, including his "down-sized" military!

    Just as the USA may not be ready for a female or a black (half-black) president, the USA may not be ready for a 72-year old former gynecologist/obstetrician - turned Congressman - Libertarian-wearing-a-Republican- cloak-just-to-get-elected.....for president!

    And, Ron Paul doesn't seem to have a clue as to the REAL reasons we were attacked on 9-11-01! He STILL thinks that it was due to having U.S. troops in Saudi, Arabia....and that it was OUR fault!

    If Ron Paul were to get the "nod" for the Republican nomination, ANY of the Democrat candidates would chew him up and spit him out in a one-on-one debate! Paul would be left on the stage, whining away!

    I'd like to see Fred Thompson, and a VP running mate of, say, Duncan Hunter....or, perhaps a total outsider in the form of Tommy Franks! Heck, Condoleeza Rice could step into the VP spot quite easily, too!
  4. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder

    We had no IRS before WW1 and the country managed nicely :shock:

    Maybe the reason he says that we were attacked on 9-11 because of our troops in Saudi Arabia, is because thats what Bin Lauden himself has said all along. foosed But hey I'm sure that G.W. and his crew know better than Bin Lauden why were attacked. You know G.W. and company would never screw up on intel. [winkthumb]

    If we would just stop trying to police the world and lock our boarders tighter than a frogs arse. Maybe just maybe we wouldn't find ourselves in these situations.

  5. Blackjack

    Blackjack Monkey+++

    DD, Those are not, I repeat NOT accurate. I posted a full reply to those bits of misinformation the last time you posted them... http://www.survivalmonkey.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3308&page=2
  6. RJB

    RJB Monkey+++

    Good post, blackjack. After reading those blatant falsehoods about Dr. Paul, my fingers were itching to do some writing, but you got it.

    DD, do your homework before posting falsehoods. Only 1/3 of the federal income comes from the income tax. If we went back to our spending budget in 2000 we wouldn't need the income tax.


    Also he didn't say we don't need intelligence gathering departments, he is against having dozens of departments, FBI, CIA, NSA, IRS, ATF etc etc. They had the info to stop 911-- reports of radicals learning to fly planes without landing and other bits. Now we have another incompetent "intelligence" bureaucracy, Homeland security that for some reason heads FEMA.

    He also doesn't care for the lack of congressional oversite of these corrupt agencies.
  7. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder

    After WWII it was deturmened that none of the millitary branches shared intel, and that caused problems and missed opertunites. So in 1947 they creatated a department that all intel would go to and be in one department. They named this department the Central Inteligence Agency ie... CIA. Now fast forward to 2001 no one is sharing intel so lets add another layer of buerocracy (sp?) to it at the tax payers exspence, and make .gov even bigger. [winkthumb] IMHO the American people will only become more and more of slaves to the government, and the part that is really sad is that they going to beg for every bit of their slavery. [beat]

  8. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    Taking on the IRS also means taking on the FED, as both are intertwined and privately owned corporations. Additionally, not one single penny -NOT ONE collected from federal taxes ever get applied to any social programs, as they are wholly absorbed by the national debt. The faster a person can recognize the true purpose of the IRS, as Congressman Paul already has, then perhaps progress can be made by eliminating the illegal and unconstitutional IRS and FED by forcing their hand and removing these European bankers once and for all.

    Of course, Ron Paul has no chance of winning an election, but this doesn't mean we cannot rally support for the cause. By simply giving up, the globalists already have won, and I believe that there are plenty of Patriots out there who would rather go out kicking and screaming than give in to tyranny and oppression.

    Like Ed Brown and company.
  9. misty

    misty Monkey+++

    I waited all day to watch RP and O'Rudely was his usual obnoxious self. Why does he even have guests on his show if he won't let them speak? And RP needs to be heard by the population! Go Ron Paul! Yes I am voting for Ron Paul!
  10. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Founding Member

    I have been thinking about this for some time. I have heard these kind of statements about Dr. Paul from others. The one that gets me the most is when they scoff and mock him for saying that our own actions were responsible for our being attacked on 9/11. Why is it so hard for people to realise the truth of that? Why is it easier for them to beleive the ridiculus statements that it was because they hate us because we're free? Or because we are wealthy. People will swallow that nonsense but laugh at the idea that our own actions have fostered the hatered and ill will of countries around the world.

    I lived and worked in the Middle East for over a decade. I wasn't isolated on a military base but out and among the people. I worked with them. I lived among them. I have been a guest in their homes. I think I have a pretty good insight into the Arab mindset. Their hatred of us doesn't come from any thing that we have or do here in our land, it comes from the meddling we have done in theirs. It was only after WWl that the Middle East shook off the yoke of colonialsm. They are very, let me repeat that, VERY sensitive to anything that smacks of foriegn interference in their affairs. I have heard numerous times "This is OUR country!"

    They are very nationalistic. And for decades we have set up and backed hated dictatorships that have raped and pillaged their countries as much as any colonial power ever did. The Shah of Iran, the Saudi royal family, the Kuwaiti Emirs. We have manipulated, meddled in, and controlled the internal politics of these nations for years. But not until the first Gulf war did we have a permanent military presence there.

    The land of Saudi Arabia is considered the most holy ground in all of Islam. The birth place of Mohammed, the home of Islam. We could have stationed troops in Qatar, Oman, or one of the other Gulf States and had little resistance. But to station American (infidel) troops on the holiest land in all of Islam was the greatest insult and sacrilage that we could ever have done. Now I am not defending nor justifying the hatred that caused, only trying to show why it did. Not only did we revive the threat of colonialism (intentionly or not), but at the same time we desecrated (in their minds) the holiest land of their religion.

    The insult that caused was as great as if American troops had of herded hundreds of pigs across the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Look at the outrage caused when they think that someone has defiled a Koran, or their prophet.

    If we had not have been interfering in Middle East affairs, propping up and supporting hated dictators and monarchies, if we had not have (in their minds) invaded and defiled their holiest land, do you really think that they would have gained such a following of men that they would give their lives to strike us? Do you think that throughout the land they have men and women joining their ranks to attack the hated infidels because we have freedom, and are wealthy and they don't and aren't?

    That is the supposition that should be ridiculed and mocked. Not the truth that our own actions have brought on the hatred and ire of the common people of the lands that we have helped corrupt governments to exploit.

    I know the reason why our government has pursued those policies. And therin lies a delimma for me. I know that we are running out of cheap oil. I know that our way of live is in grave peril and not long to be. So do we do whatever is neccessary to secure what we can while we can? I can see the rationale of it, but is it the right thing to do? I have come to belive that it isn't. I agree with Dr. Paul, it is time to bring our troops home. From Iraq, from Korea, from all the outposts of the world where we have been the policeman of the world for far to long. The threat to our way of life, to the American dream, doesn't lie overseas, it is right here at home.

    Secure our borders, build our military up, defend our nation. If we stop our empire building endeavors around the globe then we would have no need for a CIA, a NSA. We have the means within each state to manage their own law enforcement needs. Co-operate with other states to stop interstate crime. Remember the Texas Rangers? Worked pretty well for a lot of years. Then we wouldn't need a bloated and corrupt Federal law enforcement agency.

    Abolish the income tax and you have no need for an IRS buracracy that is so large that it cannot even interpret it's own laws.
    Stop interfering in the affairs of other countries. We won't bother you, but, if you attack us we will destroy you. We should be the Switzerland of the world. Even Hitlers' generals wouldn't mess with the Swiss.

    They aren't isolationists. They are a vital part of the world community, and economy, but they don't interfere in other nations affairs, and they are willing and able to inflict massive and immediate damage to any nation foolish enough to mess with them. Live and let live.

    We face the greatest crises that we as a nation have ever faced. The depletion of the foundation of our entire lifestyle. We should bring our troops home and start to re-order our world. Tear down the Mcmansions and far flung suburbia. Start building self sustained communities. Bring our population back to a more independant lifestyle that we may, may, be able to somewhat sustain as fossil fuels become more and more scarce. Develop the resources that we have inside our borders. Develop and promote as many alternatives as we can.

    But that is not the course that we are on. But it may well be the course that is forced upon us. Do you really think that Russia and China and the other nations of the world will continue to sit back and watch as we keep on consuming a 1/4 of the worlds energy?

    As we continue to manuever our military into the last of the worlds large oilfields. As we continue to spread our control over the dwindling resources that we refuse to curb our gluttonous appetite for?

    Russia is already claiming the oil of the Artic, they are rattling sabers and have signed a military pact with China. They have said that they are an ally of Iran. If we attack that nation next do you think that the Russians would just sit back and watch?

    What would make more sense? What is more probable? That they and the other nations would allow us to continue to assert our authority over what is left of the life blood of the planet, or that they would launch a surprise attack that would cripple us militarily and stop our relentless pursuit to maintain our "American way of life"?

    I foresee our entire way of life drastically changing in the very near future. And Ron Paul has the ONLY plan that will allow us to make that change as painlessly as possible. If we don't make it ourselves, if we continue on our present course, then it is my fervent belief that a radical change will be forced upon us. Unfortunately there may not be many of us left to see it.
  11. Clyde

    Clyde Jet Set Tourer Administrator Founding Member

    Thanks MM. I read it twice and I can't argue with your logic.
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary